CIA: No Benghazi Riot, Talking Points Created

By Douglas V. Gibbs

More and more evidence keeps surfacing that proves Benghazi was a fabrication, and the four dead Americans that died defending the American consulate in Libya were killed defending a great deception created for political purposes.

The Obama administration went on national television in September of 2012 to tell the American people that the Benghazi attacks were the result of an anti-American protest, caused by anger generated by an anti-Islam video.  The CIA says differently, and prior to the great lies that emerged from Washington, the CIA’s station chief in Libya pointedly told his superiors in Washington that no such demonstration occurred.  The attack was “not an escalation of protests,” the station chief wrote to then-Deputy CIA Director Michael J. Morell in an email dated Sept. 15, 2012 — a full day before the White House sent Susan E. Rice to several Sunday talk shows to disseminate talking points claiming that the Benghazi attack began as a protest over an anti-Islam video.

The talking points used by the White House, and Susan Rice, who was then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, were written by the CIA, directly ignoring the assessment by its own station chief inside Libya.

This, once again, reminds Americans that the Benghazi episode was a purposeful deception.  The question, then, must be, "Why?"

When government officials hide facts, and lie about an event, it means something is being hidden underneath.  The hidden truth is something that we may have never believed was going on.  We may have never discovered anything was being hidden by the Obama administration in the first place, which is why they fabricated the facts about the Benghazi attack.  They wanted to keep you uninformed.

The immediate thought was that the talking points were merely the White House trying to write a script consistent with the Obama narrative that al-Qaeda had been defeated, and Islam loved us now that we had "The One" on the throne in Washington DC.  However, the truth proves to be more bizarre than just a failure of policy.

The CIA was already on the ground in Benghazi, and the attacks were a cover-up designed to hide the Obama administration’s lawless arming of jihadists in Libya and Syria.

The evidence is piling up that the Obama administration was engaged in not only assisting jihadist leaders by arming them, but having a larger role in the Western-backed “revolutionaries” taking over in Libya and Syria.  In fact, some reports are indicating that the consulate in Libya was not a consulate at all, but a staging location for the CIA gun-running project.  Ambassador Stevens was brought in either to be a decoy, or to recruit and arm jihadists and terrorists to enable them to wage war on the Syrian regime after what Obama called the “success” in Libya.

It has also been suggested that the lack of security at the compound was a political ploy to conceal the extent of the lawlessness and utter chaos left in the wake of Obama’s “regime change” war on Libya.

Whatever the reasons, the most apparent part of all of this is that everything the Obama administration said to the American Public immediately following the Benghazi attack was a purposeful, blatant lie.

President Richard Nixon resigned after a threat of impeachment was on the horizon over him lying to the American People.  President Bill Clinton was impeached for lying to the American People over something as non-political as extra-marital sexual relations.

Political Pistachio reported that the Benghazi narrative was a fabrication shortly after it happened.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

CIA ignored station chief in Libya when creating talking points on Benghazi - Washington Times

Benghazi Report Ignores WH Lies, Obama Gunrunning to Jihadists - The New American

Benghazi Cover-Up Goes Deeper Than Originally Realized - Political Pistachio