SCANDAL: Petraeus Breaks From Obama – “Terrorism From The Start” (UPDATE)

Former CIA Director David Petraeus apparently made clear to Congressional lawmakers this morning that the CIA deemed the attacks against the Benghazi consulate in Libya on September 11th, 2012 to have been terrorism within hours of the event.  This estimate was then, according to Petraeus, altered by someone with direct ties to the Obama  White House and then later repeatedly communicated to the American public by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice days after the attacks.  Ambassador Rice and the Obama White House repeated the claim the Benghazi Massacre was the result of an unknown YouTube video – despite, according to this mornings closed door hearing, their own CIA Director telling them otherwise.

EXCERPT:  (via Breitbart)

Republican Congressman Peter King just exited the closed-door hearing with David Petraeus to update the media, and his description of  the ex-CIA Chief’s testimony contained more than one bombshell.

For starters, King said Petraeus told them that the CIA talking points meant for U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s Sept. 16 round robin of five Sunday network news shows, originally contained the information that there was evidence al-Qaeda elements were involved in the attack. These talking points were then altered by the White House or someone close to the White House.

This leaves us with two new and very important questions that must be answered:

If he did, why did Petraeus change his testimony?

Who changed the CIA talking points, removing the evidence an al-Qaeda element was likely involved in the murder of a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans?   LINK

______________________

And let us not forget – David Petraeus abruptly resigned just days after the 2012 election.  Was his own personal scandal the leverage the White House was using to force his compliance to go along with their version of the Benghazi Massacre?  Perhaps.  Certainly the timing is suspect – as is so much that relates to this Obama White House.  -UM

____________________

UPDATE (via HotAir)

In his closed door meeting on the Hill, “[Petraeus] will also say he had his own talking points separate from U.N. ambassador Susan Rice. [Hers] came from somewhere other in the administration than his direct talking points,” Barbara Starr of CNN reports, referencing a source close to Petraeus.

“When he looks at what Susan Rice said,” CNN reports, “here is what Petraeus’s take is, according to my source. Petraeus developed some talking points laying it all out. those talking points as always were approved by the intelligence community. But then he sees Susan Rice make her statements and he sees input from other areas of the administration. Petraeus — it is believed — will tell the committee he is not certain where Susan Rice got all of her information.”   LINK

_____________________

What we now have here is a quite recent former member of the Obama administration – the CIA Director no less, giving a very strong indication that a person or persons with direct ties to the Obama White House,  aggressively altered the CIA assessment of who was actually behind the deadly terrorist attack of September 11th, 2012.  This alteration/lie was then repeated for days to the American people.

The question now is WHO ALTERED THE CIA ASSESSMENT?  And if there was in fact a “stand down” order that in effect, sentenced those four Americans to death – WHO GAVE THAT ORDER?

Related to those two simple, yet critical questions, is this now breaking news item:

CIA to investigate Petraeus as he testifies?

In a story line full of credibility-stretching coincidences, NBC brings us one that doesn’t even clear the laugh test.  Just two days after David Petraeus offered to testify on his knowledge of the Benghazi attack and its aftermath, and on the same day when the first of those appearances by the former CIA director will take place, NBC News breaks the story that the agency will open an investigation into Petraeus’ affair with biographer Paula Broadwell to see if Petraeus abused CIA resources to conduct it.  LINK

______________________

It seems increasingly clear the Obama White House is more than willing to attempt to destroy the reputation of the most celebrated American military leader in a generation in the hopes of intimidating him to shut up about what he knows regarding the Benghazi Massacre.  Pure Chicago Thug politics at a level this country has never seen.  -UM

____________________

Cover for 'The Man Who Calls Himself Obama Volume III'

The Man Who Calls Himself Obama Volume III

 

524 days ago by in News | You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
About the

Be courteous to all, but intimate with few, and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence. -G. Washington

18 Comments to SCANDAL: Petraeus Breaks From Obama – “Terrorism From The Start” (UPDATE)
    • NameBM
    • A thought this morning which might make WHI feel better.

      What if the Senate conference, which was planned and did not happened before the elections, was cancelled because it was a done deal Obama was going to win the elections via agreement and/or fraud. The decision might have been taken soon before election day to stop battling for the election per se and to move the battlefield on a “watergate” like one the day after.

      A typical Military move to change the theater of combat: Understanding that the field parameters, i.e. minorities + fraud, made victory impossible and moving the battle onto a theater where such parameters are irrelevant, i.e. Congress hearings and courts of law.

      Sure looks like it’s going that way so far. It is clear the target is Jarrett which if taken down, not wounded but taken down, would live Obama widely exposed. It would also explained why Holder has been kept in place to provide secondary firewall in case Jarrett has to retreat.

      • luxuryoption
      • @NameBM:
        Your analysis assumes there is an oppostion party [position] within the government. THERE IS NO OPPOSITION. What you are witnessing is theatrics. WHI finally got the message – and became disgusted.

      • cobra
      • The best answer for the missing repubic push about Benghazi before the election is the simplest: THE REPUBICS ARE WHIMPS, NOGOODNICKS.
        Aside from Occam’s razor, we know that’s true.
        Get over it.
        we must form a third, patriotic party.

      • Francesca
      • Why can’t someone find out something on Valerie Jarrett? What expertise does she have to be making many of the decisions for Obama? (Killing vs non-killing of Osama bin Laden, for example) She is behind a lot of what is going on, I think. What does she have on Obama and Michelle? WE need some aggressive investigators to ferret out some helpful info. Who will come forward for us? What about Sheriff Joe’s findings? We can see that the media is the barrier to getting out the truth. Who can help?

    • Publius
    • Who changed CIA talking points? Tom Donilon and/or John Brennan (who’s been “floated” as next nominee for D/CIA). These people are despicable political hacks – perfectly suited for jobs in Obama administration.

      And Congress will continue their feckless closed-door hearings because it gives all sides the cover they need to keep spewing their talking points to network cameras – safe in the knowledge that no one can contradict them without breaching confidentiality of non-public hearing,

    • bill o'rights
    • I’D LIKE TO PROVIDE A HEADS-UP FOR EVERYONE!!!

      I’ve been receiving correspondence from many people who follow this forum. While many of us here are conservatives, there are many others who frequent this forum as well.

      In lieu of the present situation…namely, that the results of the election have not yet been signed off on, I think we need to go out of our way to clarify that what we’re facing is not partisan in nature. Indeed, our battle is against an enemy that has usurped our nation, including both parties. And, we fight this battle not as party affiliates but as Americans, regardless of our party affinities.

      With that in mind, I am posting the following link, which provides evidence of the bipartisan support out there to stop the ongoing destruction of America:

      http://wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/contact.htm

      It should be noted that this film is one of the main reasons so many Democrats turned away from the Obama administration in 2012 (and they did!!!!).

      Some of you have seen it, others have not. But we need to keep the pressure on and we must educate as many as possible.

      I hope that those whose affinities lie on the political left will see this documentary and understand that we are all in this together, against a common enemy.

      For those who want to go that extra mile, perhaps you could help out by contacting Bettina Viviano and encourage her to create a new video, related to the 2012 elections.

    • truthandjustice
    • Heard from two attorneys last night on Fox for the first time mentioning impeachment….IF they can prove the President lied. Therefore you have to prove he knew the truth about it being terrorism. Didn’t hear anything about if/when he told Hillary/Obama, etc. – just that he sent out his conclusions to the other Depts. & seems like some mysterious person whom no one knows changed them. Plus you still have him lying in mid-Sept. that it was the video. ????? We’re not getting anywhere that really matters it seems to me…which, I would think – is exactly what they want….so far. ????

    • truthandjustice
    • And then there’s….this: (JILL KELLY)

      “Jill Khawam Kelley was the hand-picked lobbyist for Muslim nations and their agenda at Central Command.

      Kelley, who is part of the soap opera that the Petraeus scandal spawned, was in charge of hosting parties and social events to push the Islamic agenda of Middle Eastern countries. She was seen by Muslim Mid-East nations, especially Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon, as the “go to” woman to push their agenda on top American generals. She was a lobbyist for their cause and, yet, wasn’t required to register as a lobbyist, like all others who host lavish parties for top American officials, like she did, in an attempt to influence U.S. policy in the Middle East.

      Kelley, a dhimmi Christian Arab of Lebanese descent, was well known in the Muslim Arab embassies of Washington for doing their bidding and hosting their parties at and near MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, where our nation’s top generals are based. It’s where Central Command–the U.S. Armed Forces’ leadership over wars and military personnel Middle East–is headquartered.

      I’ve long written about the infiltration of Central Command at MacDill Air Base in Tampa by Islamic terrorists. Islamic Jihad founder and convicted Islamic terrorist, Sami Al-Arian, was an instructor on the Middle East to our top generals at MacDill Air Force Base AT THE VERY SAME TIME that he was planning mergers and terrorist attacks in Israel with “the brothers of HAMAS” and while he was bringing Muslim illegal alien Islamic terrorists to the U.S. Al-Arian’s friend and co-conspirator, Ramadan Abdullah Shallah (one of those Al-Arian brought here), who became the Secretary-General of the worldwide Islamic Jihad terrorist group, was also a lecturer at MacDill and also taught our top generals his poisonous views on the Middle East and Israel. FBI and INS agents who investigated Shallah and Al-Arian were alarmed at the influence these two top Islamic terrorists had over CentCom. They were also alarmed to find many books on the inner workings of MacDill in Shallah’s house when they raided it.

      So when people ask me how I think these women were able to insert themselves into top generals’ lives and topple them (along with, apparently, the men they married), I think back to the fact that our top generals gladly allowed top terrorists to infiltrate Central Command as alleged “professors” on the Middle East. And when generals like Petraeus and Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. openly attack Israel and America’s relationship with Israel, people like Jill Khawam Kelley and Al-Arian and Shallah are the reason why. Khawam Kelley isn’t an innocent socialite. She’s an agent of influence for Arab Muslim nations.

      I guarantee you that Jill Khawam Kelley wasn’t hosting visits from dignitaries from Israel. And, other than those from Israel, every single “Middle Eastern diplomat” in Washington is a Muslim, most of them Muslim Arabs. And all of them Muslims with an agenda that is anti-Israel and anti-Western. And definitely not in America’s best interests. They come to Tampa for one reason and one reason only–to ingratiate themselves with the top military brass at CentCom at MacDill.

      And Jill Khawam Kelley was their social director in that mission.

      Kelley’s sister, Natalie Khawam, was married to a top Bush administration official, Grayson Wolfe, Director of Broader Middle East Initiatives and Iraqi Reconstruction at the Export-Import Bank of the United States, and frequently accompanied him on trips to the Middle East, including to Pakistan. Before that position, Wolfe was the Bush-installed Manager of the Private Sector Development Office of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad, Iraq. How many of the Khawam’s insider Arab Muslim friends did he give sweetheart contracts to?

      the Khawam chicks are modern day Mata Haris for the Muslim Arabs.

      Just look at what they’ve accomplished for the Muslim Mid-East, all of it under the radar . . . until Paula Broadwell had the stupidity to send her threatening e-mails and Jill Khawam Kelley had the stupidity of complaining about it to shirtless FBI agent Frederic Humphries.”

      http://www.debbieschlussel.com/56333/jill-kelley-helped-muslim-nations-hezbollahs-lebanon-infiltrate-central-command-macdill-base-go-to-girl-for-muslim-parties-w-generals/

    • Paloma
    • At the time that Obama announced that he was making a switch in positions between Leon Panetta and General Petraeus, it set off a little nagging thought in my mind – Why? Panetta is a known Communist who sides with BHO, and Obama has shown his antipathy for the military on numerous occasions. That took place around the same time that there was a mention or two in the LSM about a very top secret site the Government was building (I think in Utah?), that was to be equipped with some of the newest, fastest and most powerful supercomputers, encryption software and the capability to receive and store any messages sent on the internet, phone calls, etc. Was the plan to have complete info available on almost everyone, to be used when and where there was a need for it? I have little doubt that this is the case.

Leave A Response

* Required

-->