3 ms·
Seems like the facts listed in the first paragraph are substantial indications for it having at least something to do with the attack. It wouldn't be the first
by daveguy 10y ago
Seems like the facts listed in the first paragraph are substantial indications for it having at least something to do with the attack. It wouldn't be the first time or the last time extremist muslims reacted violently. Do you have a source for that complete debunking?
Edit: The article as a whole isn't about just that incident either. It is about the growing suppression of speech from regimes of all kinds.
- ones_and_zeros 10y agoIt is the corner stone of the Benghazi investigations. HRC wrote in an email that they "knew" the attack was planned and had nothing to do with the video yet kept repeating that it was because of the video to the public. Her defense was pretty pathetic. [0] [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/10/22/transcript-clinton-testifies-before-house-committee-on-benghazi/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/10...