House Intelligence Committee's Benghazi Report Torches Conspiracy Theories


WASHINGTON – Yet another detailed investigation into the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, has refuted claims that there was a coverup or that officials didn’t do all they could at the time to save the four Americans killed that night.
The latest findings, released Friday, come from the declassified two-year investigationof the House Intelligence Committee, which conducted an exhaustive probe into the incident, including claims that the White House cooked up phony talking points for then-UN Ambassador Susan Rice.

I hope we can move on and quit spending time and money on even more investigations. Any thoughts?


Four americans died unnecessarily. We can not let it go.

We need answers to why its blamed on a “video”. We need answers to why an officer who was near there was told not to help.

We need real closure for the families who lost their sons




Over 4,000 Americans died unnecessarily in Iraq in an illegal war. Why aren’t conservatives upset about that fact? :confused:


Most theories debunked, maybe not all. The report may not resolve the gun-running question as well but here, I respect the government has a certain right to privacy and things we don’t need to know.

But perhaps the most significant conclusion is its finding that Rice’s talking points – a key focus of the Benghazi Select Committee empaneled by House Speaker John Boehner – were not part of an attempt to conceal the severity of the incident.

According to the report, early intelligence that the attacks were sparked by an Internet video was “not accurate,” but not intentionally so. And the report holds that the process that produced Rice’s now-infamous talking points was flawed, resulting in errors rather than deliberate lies. Indeed, the report determined that the CIA had not sorted out the conflicting intelligence until two days after Rice appeared on television claiming the attacks stemmed from a protest.

So false information was still relayed to the American public concerning the ‘internet video’, we are just told that it was not intentional to do so. One wonders a bit on how they could have blamed the video in the first place.


That’s your opinion, Congress passed an order to invade it, Hillary Clinton voted for it.


And the intelligence committee hasn’t debunked the “told not to help” story, or cleared up why it was assumed to be blamed on the simultaneous protests over said video?

The Benghazi conspiracy is*** a dead horse***.

Bad things happen in life: we grieve, show respect, and go on living - hopefully in a way that those who sacrificed for us are honored and remembered.


I’ll give you a clue: who was in the WH and who was lined up to try and succeed him?



The President and his administration lied about the cause of the attack which was verified by Gen Clapper telling Sec. Panetta on the day of the attack that it was a coordinated terrorist attack and Panetta said he advised the President that it was a terrorist attack when he was on The O’Reilly Factor a few months ago. Bottom line Obama knew it was a real terrorist attack and let the BS story of a youtube video become the official story.

Lastly, the Republicans really screwed up this investigation because about a year ago Chaffetz was The O’Reilly Factor when it became known that Clapper said it was a terrorist attack and Bill O’Reilly was strongly advising Chaffetz to have Panetta come in to answer that question. Never did happen, but somehow O’Reilly can.


This is a compilation of 7 investigations. I guess if O’Reilly knew what went down he could have appeared before one of these committees. Now there is an 8th in progress which is a total waste of time and money.

Here’s more:
WASHINGTON (AP) — A two-year investigation by the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee has found that the CIA and the military acted properly in responding to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, and asserted no wrongdoing by Obama administration appointees.
Debunking a series of persistent allegations hinting at dark conspiracies, the investigation of the politically charged incident determined that there was no intelligence failure, no delay in sending a CIA rescue team, no missed opportunity for a military rescue, and no evidence the CIA was covertly shipping arms from Libya to Syria.
In the immediate aftermath of the attack, intelligence about who carried it out and why was contradictory, the report found. That led Susan Rice, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to inaccurately assert that the attack had evolved from a protest, when in fact there had been no protest. But it was intelligence analysts, not political appointees, who made the wrong call, the committee found. The report did not conclude that Rice or any other government official acted in bad faith or intentionally misled the American people.


The Huffington Post is not a source for truth. It is liberal propaganda and is not valuable news intelligence. Recommend close study of the non disclosed facts and the more obvious use of political spin.:ballspin:


As well as John Kerry and a host of others !


Actually the vote was taken to go into Afghanistan where we believed the terrorists to be. The only thing that was in Iraq were the oil fields.

The Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), Pub. L. 107-40, codified at 115 Stat. 224 and passed as S.J.Res. 23 by the United States Congress on September 14, 2001, authorizes the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. The authorization granted the President the authority to use all “necessary and appropriate force” against those whom he determined “planned, authorized, committed or aided” the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups. The AUMF was signed by President George W. Bush on September 18, 2001.


Even if that were true, the matter is still a dead horse. If I had a dollar for every time some public figure lied, I’d be sitting pretty right about now. Righteous indignation, I generally reserve for the actual important business that gets side-tracked because politicians are too busy keeping their seats or trying to strip someone else of theirs.

Maybe we need to rewrite the Constitution to make it so that a group of representatives are elected to each office, and they are allotted turns to go to D.C. to vote on different substantive issues…whatever one leaves unfinished, the others get to pick up; after their term gets done, voters decide which of them are replaced for poor performance- the others get to remain. It would save these endless cycles of elections and campaigning which only get momentarily disturbed by real work.


An illegal war?


If any of the GOP candidates focus on this issue, it tells me they don’t have any original ideas. It’s probably too much to ask, but I would like all candidates, on both sides of the aisle, to engage in legitimate debate about their ideas for governing.


I agree with you, but it looks like it is too much to ask.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit