In a closed meeting with the House Intelligence Committee, former CIA director David PetraeusÂ toldÂ representatives that the Obama administrationâ€™s account of the attack on Benghazi does not match CIA intelligence provided at the time. Petraeus was adamant that the attack was terroristic in nature. He mentioned that the Department of Justice and US State Department were corroborating his account of the events.
PetraeusÂ spentÂ 90 minutes in talks with the House and another 90 minutes with the Senate before leaving Congress.
Petraeusâ€™ recollection invalidates Susan Rice, US Ambassador to the UN, initial comments about Benghazi who claimed it was the result of non-associated protests based on an anti-Muslim film.
House Representative Kent Conrad said, after the meeting with Petraeus, that the former CIA director agreed with Riceâ€™s account. Conrad said: â€śAmbassador Rice used the unclassified talking points that the entire intelligence community signed off on, so she did the appropriate thing.â€ť Conrad went on to explain that because of classified information that could not be recounted to the public, the story becomes convoluted with â€śpeople saying different things at different timesâ€ť because of the need to keep sources anonymous and â€śpeople saying different things at different times.â€ť
Obama made it clear that those Senators who doubt Riceâ€™s account of the initial reports on Benghazi â€śshould go after me.â€ť ObamaÂ continued:Â â€śAnd Iâ€™m happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation, is outrageous. But when they go after the U.N. ambassador, apparently because they think sheâ€™s an easy target, thenÂ they’veÂ got a problem with me. And should I choose â€” if I think that she would be the best person to serve America in the capacity â€” the State Department, then I will nominate her. Thatâ€™s not a determination thatÂ I’veÂ made yet.â€ť
The official account first relayed to the publicÂ did notÂ specify that 2 Navy SEALS (not US Marines) had been killed alongside CIA-asset J. Christopher Stevens and Sean Smith, employee of the US State Department.
House Representative Peter King, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee recounted that Petraeus told the panel that the majority of what he would say â€świll all be classified other than it was clear it did not arise from a demonstration and it was a terror attack.â€ť
King remembered that originally Obama and Petraeus together downplayed the actuality of the attack on Benghazi, which was said to have been started by the anti-Muslim flim; however that element quickly came under question and was abandoned.
The former CIA director alsoÂ revealedÂ that the original CIA account of Benghazi, regarding the reference to a terrorist attack, was scrubbed from the CIA draft by federal agencies.
King stated that the Committee would be seeking the testimony of â€śofficials in the State Department, the Defense Department and also people at the White House â€“ to see if anyone at the White House changed the talking points.â€ť
It is unclear who actually came up with the talking points. At first the Obama administration had placed the focus onto al-Qaeda, yet Petraeus indicates that it was just â€śextremistsâ€ť.
Although Petraeus could not say who exactly had removed the reference to terrorism from CIA documents, it was clear from Riceâ€™s statements that the account was no longer on official record.
House Representative Adam Schiff recounted that Petraeus did not support the theory that the Obama administration deliberately misled the public in initial statements about Benghazi. Schiff said: â€śThere was an interagency process to draft it, not a political process.They came up with the best assessment without compromising classified information or source or methods. So changes were made to protect classified information. The general was adamant there was no politicization of the process, no White House interference or political agenda. He completely debunked that idea.â€ť
It is not clear if PetraeusÂ mentionedÂ the true nature of Stevensâ€™ mission in Benghazi. Although it may be considered classified information, the American public would be able to piece together the puzzle if this fact were common knowledge.
J. Christopher Stevens was promoted in less than 1 year through the ranks from a Pearson Fellow of the Committee on Foreign Relations to US Ambassador which is unprecedented.
In Benghazi, Stevens stayed at a gated-villa, leased by the US State Department from a local man named Mohammad al-Bishari. This location housed Stevens where he spoke with the National Transitional Council (NTC), a defaco-government in Libya that assisted the US in the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. Headquartered in Benghazi and the self-proclaimed â€śonly legitimate body representing the people of Libya and the Libyan state.â€ť
Stevens had previously been designated as a special representative to the NTC during the US-controlled Libyan revolution. To mask Stevens new role, he was given US Ambassador status and stationed in Tripoli.
Bishari has confirmed that Stevens would stay at the villa when he met with the NTC. Stevensâ€™ mission in Benghazi was to gather intelligence for the CIA â€śconducting surveillance and collecting information on an array of armed militant groups in and around the city.â€ť
One group Stevens was heavily monitoring was the Ansar al-Sharia who is directly connected with the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafi extremists who carry out covert operations for the Saudi Arabian government by terrorist means.
Stevensâ€™ work with the CIA extends back to 2011.
Stevens spent time negotiating with the NTC because of the international communityâ€™s self- recognition of the faction as a legitimate government because of their seat at the UN, as well as assisting the CIA in watching the Ansar al-Sharia which is why he spent so much time in Benghazi.
Petraeus was well aware of Stevensâ€™s role in Benghazi. When Stevens died, the CIA agents who worked with him during his intelligence gathering missions said that the agency â€ślost a good pair of eyes.â€ť This comment explains the entire reason for a massive cover-up being perpetrated onto the American public complete with an extramarital affair to keep us distracted.
In reality, Islamic terrorist factions that work with the US were employed by the Saudi Arabian government to take out one of Petraeusâ€™ CIA spies. That spyâ€™s name was J. Christopher Stevens.
Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism, anÂ alternative news site dedicated to reporting the news as it actually happens; not as it is spun by the corporate-funded mainstream media. You can find Occupy Corporatism on theirÂ Facebook page .
Please share: Spread the word to sheeple far and wide
The ideas expressed on this site are solely the opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the opinions of sponsors or firms affiliated with the author(s). The author may or may not have a financial interest in any company or advertiser referenced. Any action taken as a result of information, analysis, or advertisement on this site is ultimately the responsibility of the reader. The Daily Sheeple is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.