Where Did the Benghazi Video Excuse Come From?

Vanity | May 17, 2013 | Sampleman

[SampleMan]

The question keeps being asked, "Where did the claim come from that the Youtube video was responsible for the attack in Benghazi?"

The total lack of references to the video in the raw intelligence reports and even the CYA email chain indicates that it was a late construction in the story.

But why would it be put out and why so prominently? I truly believe the answer is self-evident. Benghazi is a three part scandal: 1. Incompetent handling of security warnings and concerns prior to the attack. Warnings were ignored and no response plan was in place. 2. Criminal negligence in the response during the attack. Not only was no action taken, but no action was even contemplated. They waited 7 hrs for help, but had they survived 12, 18, or even 24 hours, no help would have arrived, because the entire process had been shut down as a “no go” quite early on. They were simply left to die. 3. Cover-up of #1 and #2.

Obama/Clinton needed something to explain their massive failings concerning #1. They needed an unexpected, unpredictable catalyst for the attack. Something that would divert attention from the truth. In the world of Muslim Rage, there is always some trivial event that is the latest outrage, and given nonsensical and violent responses to cartoons, most anything is believable.

Before the bodies were even cold, the story tellers went to work, “We need something to pin a sudden unpredictable attack on, what are those crazy SOBs mad at now? ”. Someone in the room knew about the video and floated it. As a canard it was almost perfect, no one had heard about it, and who wouldn’t believe Muslims would kill over it. After it was seized on, it was hard sold, over sold, by the administration, something that Freepers picked up on immediately. As the video was unknown, Obama felt he had to explain it in simple terms to the press (projecting his own intelligence) and then direct them to the proper narrative, “Crazy Muslims gone wild about video.” He made the mistake of over selling it. Hillary was even hard selling the families at Dover on it. Very heavy handed.

The video was the deflection for all of the standard “why” questions, and 95% of the media ran with it, no questions asked. But now that part 3 of the scandal is being investigated, the video is being revealed as a magical creation that came out of nowhere, with no trail, not even a reference in the intelligence.

The vacuum created by the video’s origin is now the gateway back to part 1 of the scandal. Why were the clear warnings of a predicted attack ignored?

[jobim]

1. Incompetent handling of security warnings and concerns prior to the attack.
My armchair sleuthing doesn't lead me to agree with this point.
This administration is expressly involved in the building of a
Muslim Brotherhood caliphate, which includes removing Assad
in Syria. The gun-running out of Benghazi through Turkey needed
cover & silence to operate effectively. They needed a place
for Stevens to periodically oversee the transactions, but one
sufficiently invisible to the media.

2.Criminal negligence in the response during the attack.
Again, because these were covert operations, exposing this through
a calamitous event involving our military was to be avoided. Among
the weapons on the ground there were surface-to-air rockets capable
of taking down our aircraft sent to rescue/fight. The administration
simply could not afford this exposure. Indeed, avoid any fighting
on our side whatsoever and think of a reason later was the impromptu plan.

3. Cover-up of #1 and #2.
Interesting thing about the concoction they went with - the video - is its history.
Back when all this happened, there was a website which unfortunately I now forgot,
where a fellow traces the lineage of this video, how it went through several names,
and what URL or IPS (I'm not very knowledgeable about this stuff) put it up on youtube,
tracing it in Arlington, VA I believe. I think it possible that they found this
video and kept it in the ready for just such an occasion, which is the modus operandi of the Left.

[Kharis13]

Well thought out, simple and to-the-point synopsis of the Benghazi cover-up. There’s been a lot of talk floated about gun running, prisoner exchanges to make Obama look heroic, etc. I’m of the opinion the whole scenario is much simpler, basically what you’re claiming, SampleMan. This administration was asleep at the switch, got caught with their pants down, and then, because of the impending election, they had to cover up their mistakes.

So where do we go from here? Just keep connecting the dots and watch where the line leads. I think we all know where.

[Java4Jay]

Go back earlier in the day when the embassy in Cairo Egypt was attacked. The walls were breached and our flag was torn down. Embassy personnel sent out tweets apologizing for ‘the video’ at some point either before or during the attack. This whole thing about ‘The Video’ was staged long before.

[TigersEye]

Only the final version of "the video" was forwarded, by persons unknown, to Sheikh Khalid Abdullah the cleric in Cairo who aired it on TV. Nakoula, the maker of the original film, was not the one who uploaded the final version, Innocence of Muslims, to the internet.

To: Cincinatus' Wife

It had actually been online since July, but nobody had paid attention to its crude libels against the Prophet Mohammed until Mr Abdullah's show broadcast clips from it last weekend, calling for the film-makers to be executed.

That clearly is not an explanation for these warnings then.

Egypt intelligence warns (on Sept 4th) of attacks on Israel, US embassies

Congress was warned about Libya last month

6 posted on Sunday, September 16, 2012 2:27:02 AM by TigersEye (dishonorabledisclosure.com - OPSEC (give them support))

Egyptian intelligence warns of attacks on the U.S. and Israeli embassies a month before Sheik Khalid Abdullah aired his little seen outtakes of Innocence of Muslims.

[TigersEye]

It had actually been online since July, but nobody had paid attention to its crude libels against the Prophet Mohammed until Mr Abdullah's show broadcast clips from it last weekend, calling for the film-makers to be executed.

That clearly is not an explanation for these warnings then.

Egypt intelligence warns (on Sept 4th) of attacks on Israel, US embassies

Congress was warned about Libya last month

[Mygirlsmom]

The first known non-specific reference to "the video" was made in apologies tweeted by the Cairo embassy in the early morning of Sept. 11th before any crowd had assembled there.

That is significant, since I have posted previously a recording from a guy who was guarding Coptic churches in Cairo at that time. He told a radio host in Tucson that the US Embassy in Cairo (and the WH) KNEW an attack was planned for 9/11 as early as August 25th.

[lacrew]

The complete absence of the video in the released e-mails indicates:

We don’t have the really important e-mails.

[TigersEye]

You can hear some interesting things about the timeline of all these iterations of "the movie" in the Youtube video linked below. Start at 9:30 and watch to 16:00 for the meat of that.

False Flag, Currently Underway ?

The analysis you are referring to. Montagraph has several videos about it.

[Okieshooter]

And who would have fed Hillery the story about the video?

Her assistant, Huma Mahmood Abedin who has connections to the Muslim Brotherhood that would have likely been aware of the video. Also blaming Bengazzi on the video would have been politically beneficial to the MB.

[SampleMan]

We don’t have the really important e-mails.

Concur, and the lack of reference to the video in the one's we do have proves it.

[TigersEye]

Exactly. See post #24. Egyptian intelligence warned on Sept. 4th that the Cairo embassy would be attacked. It was no surprise and was not spontaneous.

[TigersEye]

Huma Abedin or John O Brennan?

[Okieshooter]

“Huma Abedin or John O Brennan?”

Another MB plant in our government. Civilization jihad is alive and well in the highest reaches of our government.

[Artie]

IMO, the video of the was always going to be part of the cover story...when or if things went south with the “kidnapping operation”. It was a CIA contrived and produced part of the caper.

[dfwgator]

That’s what angers me the most about this whole thing....they wanted by attacking the video, to attack our rights to Free Speech.

[Scotswife]

I’ll have to go with Valerie Jarrett on this one.

[TigersEye]

It began as a set up reason to explain the protest-turned-attack on the Cairo embassy. Which they knew as early as August was going to happen. There were two or three main reasons for that protest and none of them were "the video." One was to demand the release of the Blind Sheik. Another reason was anger that an Al-Qaeda leader had recently been snuffed by a drone thus the "0bama we are all Osama" signs they carried. There were also a number of protestors who wore Guy Fawkes masks, something associated with American and European anarchist-socialists (like the OWS freaks) not Muslims.

For some reason 0bama and Hillary wanted the press to blame something other than the real reasons for the protest.

[vpintheak]

I also want to know where the video maker is. Does anyone know?

[TigersEye]

In prison in LA. Not one reporter has been curious enough to ask for an interview with him.

[muir_redwoods]

And did the videographer ever get out of jail?

[cincinnati65]

To my recollection, the “video” only had a few hundred hits when I found it, which was well after it was used as the excuse.