I'm not sure it is a fake story. But you're right, it is weird. Do you think - like the witch hunters Republicans who have called this hearing - and the two previous - that the administration lied? What would anyone in the administration have to gain by purposely lying?
The only reasonable motive I can think of, other than gross incompetence, would be to keep the Obama Administration's reputation as extremely effect against Islamist groups high until after the election.
The whole theory sounds like something I would expect from a twoofer.
Do you really need to drag that kind of mud slinging here?
That's not what I heard. Well, rather, it's no what I heard from non-right wing news sites.
Part of the pertinent information from people like Hicks is establishing what the various parts of government knew and when. Everyone who was on the ground was saying that this was a coordinated attack from Islamists.
Reviewing how the two separate attacks unfolded, it's preposterous to believe that the deaths occurred from protesters. They descended upon the compound in a wave. The attackers used RPGs, grenades, mortars and
truck mounted artillery pieces. As the soldiers rushed, trucks blocked the roads leading away.
Hours later, the attackers repeated similar tactic on the CIA annex.
Nothing suggests a disorganized protest. No one on the ground thought it was a protest gone wrong. The CIA did not believe that was a protest gone wrong.
And yet that was what was published by the government.
If the government was truly suffering from "fog of war", I would expect them to state that they did not yet have all the details. I don't expect them to make
up that paints them in the best possible light.
