No evdidence found that Al Qaeda planned Libya attack...
...wonder how this is going to change the debate rhetoric tomorrow.
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/oct/19/world/la-fg-libya-attack-20121020
"A second U.S. official added, "There isn't any intelligence that the attackers pre-planned their assault days or weeks in advance." Most of the evidence so far suggests that "the attackers launched their assault opportunistically after they learned about the violence at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo" earlier that day, the official said."
= new reply since forum marked as read
The CIA is biased/liberal!!! Or they'll accuse President Obama of pressuring analysts into giving him the answers he wanted (a la Cheney).
Wish I could say that I'm just joking but I'm almost certain that somebody on the right will make at least one of the above accusations.
...this may change the line of attack. In other words, Romnutz won't have his usual bag of ammo to throw and can't go back to saying that the Obama Administration were trying to fool the American people by saying this attack was connected to the video.
With this new evidence, we can all make the proper assumptions:
1. It was an act of terror (literally, even if Al Qaeda wasn't involved), and;
2. It was in connection to the anti-Islam film even if only due to the riots over the film in Cairo providing opportunity to attack in Libya.
The president did call it an act of terror in the Rose Garden (no matter how one tries to splice it) and his administration did have a right to connect it to the film - unless you want to believe that the whole world is on one big liberal conspiracy to back Obama.
Knowing the right wing faction - that's exactly what they'll claim.
Regardless, I think this will dull the blade on the whole Benghazi attack by the Republicans no matter how hard they try to spin it.
