Petraeus Tells House Committee – Benghazi Was Terrorist Attack (Video)

Former CIA Director told a Congressional Committee this morning that he believed the attack on the Benghazi Consulate was a terrorist strike – almost immediately.

The terrorists blocked off the streets and carried RPG’s with them to the consulate.

Obama said this was a YouTube protest.

More… Rep. King: Petraeus Said CIA’s Talking Points Were Edited to Play Down Terrorism

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed,
Gateway Pundit

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

  • Rachelle

    So why didn’t he say so the first time he testified?

    Too many of our generals are political generals. How can the troops have any confidence in anything they say or do?

  • Kissmygrits

    Was he lying then or is he lying now. It’s easier to discredit someone after they flip flop. See John Kerry.

  • Mark

    Because Barry was hanging affair over his head for favorable ( to Barry) testimony then. Payback’s a Mf’er

  • JoyO

    I believe the White House knew about the affair before appointing him as CIA Director; it then held it over his head and applied pressure to get his 9/13 briefing to Congress. Let’s not get too excited because our Pravda Press will not cover this or, if they do, will focus all reporting on the question “Was he lying then or is he lying now?”

    Honestly, I am shocked he is still alive. I thought the Chicago thugs in the White House would have eliminated him by now.

  • Pingback: Petraeus Tells House Committee – Benghazi Was Terrorist Attack (Video)Politifreak()

  • Edd

    This just keeps getting better all the time. So, any bets on how long his sycophant press hold out? Oh wait, I forgot. We’re only asking these questions because we’re racist homophobes. Just thought I’d get that out before they did.

  • donh

    and now Obama thug fascist media drops allegations of child porn found on Petraeus home computer before noon…and sacks a couple more generals …fires FBI director.

  • forest

    Who blackmailed him into lying last time?

  • GotFreedom

    Will his testimony endanger his wife’s job at the wonderful, Dodd-Frank created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. . .you know, the one that fauxcahontas Elizabeth Warren used to oversee???

    “Obama Administration Gave Petraeus’s Wife a $187,605-Per-Year Job”

  • jainphx

    What difference does it make? Our side will huff and puff, and thats where it will stop. Is Holder gone? How about all those papers siezed from Solyndra by the FBI? Do we know what was in there? Where are our intrepid leaders to fight, can’t fight from under the bed. John Boehner: Now there’s an example of intestinal fortitude. They know as well as we do how much voter fraud went on, and yet sat back and is doing nothing.

  • lIZ

    We knew this, as you stated. What matters is no one has the political will to go after the man in the White House who CLEARLY has blood on his hands here. We are in a moral fog here, as a nation. It will get worse.

  • Highlander

    So, if Susan Rice was speaking five days after the attack (on the Sunday morning “news” shows), based on the best available intelligence at the time, then where was that intelligence coming from? From the General’s previous testimony, it would seem that someone had the CIA alter the intelligence to promote the video narrative. And that someone had to be the White House. No one else had the means or the motive.

    Now – what does Petraeus have to say about our lack of response to the attack itself?

  • Pingback: Petraeus Tells House Committee – Benghazi Was Terrorist Attack (Video) | The Navigator Online()

  • Huck

    Everyone knows it was a terrorist attack.

    The question that needs to be asked is “what is the Obama administration trying to cover up?”.

    Could it be a White House run program to arm the Syrian rebels (including Al Qaida affiliated) by sending arms through Turkey and paid for by the Saudis?

  • myohmy

    That is nothing new. Everybody knows that. Obama’s henchmen are atonewalling the truth. One by one they are stonewalling who dares to challenge them. Lap dog media hates themselves so much that they willing to peddle the lies for administration.

    The propagandists media still like to be invited for WH cocktail parties while the rest of us rubes have to content with welfare checks and food stamp.

  • deatheaters

    The “White House” that prepared these talking points, to which President Obama, Petreaus, and others continually refer to as “He Who Shall Not Be Named” in Harry Potter fashion, is otherwise known as John Brennan.

    For a little background on this less than pleasant totalitarianist, Foreign Policy has a good article.

  • deatheaters
  • Marcy

    The sad truth is that the media can make or break obama. They have the power to bring out the full truth and destroy him. But they don’t. I don’t understand why they don’t. That’s what we have to uncover. Benghazi is a mystery wrapped in an enigma, wrapped in a puzzle, wrapped in a riddle. Each story brings more questions. WHO gave the order to change the CIA’s talking points so that they downplayed the terrorists attack? Did anyone have the courage to ask that question?

  • saveus

    so we reelected a lying snake
    who would have thought?

  • rabble-rouser

    what’s that old saying, “Oh what wicked web we weave when we try to deceive…”