Inside The Right-Wing Love Affair With Conspiracy Theories

2012_Benghazi_attack_photo_montageCJ Werleman says “there’s a reason Benghazi hysteria just won’t go away,” writing for AlterNet via Salon:

The New York Times recently published what is arguably the most comprehensive examination of the events that took place leading up to the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi. The six-part, multimedia report is not only the most exhaustive account of the tragedy ever published by a major news organization, it is also completely apolitical. In other words, it revealed the truth. Yet right-wing conspiracy theorists refuse to believe it.

While the article hardly paints the administration in a positive light, it makes clear that right-wing, echo chamber-generated conspiracy theories have no basis in reality. Central to the right’s Benghazi narrative was the claim that President Obama, facing a fight for reelection, chose to lie and conceal the truth on Benghazi. In other words, the administration “knew” it was a carefully planned and orchestrated attack carried out by al-Qaeda, but instead chose to spin the story that it was a spontaneous protest carried out by a mob of Islamists, who were reacting to the release of anti-Muslim YouTube documentary.

The truth, however, punches holes in the GOP’s preferred version of what happened that day, and in doing so, yet another right-wing conspiracy unravels before our eyes:

“Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault.

The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.”

Benghazi now joins a laundry list of debunked right-wing conspiracies during the Obama presidency, taking its place alongside such faux-scandals as the IRS, Fast & Furious, and Obama’s birth certificate. But the GOP, having invested so much into Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi, has now taken to the airwaves to reassure its faithful that the NYT report is a conspiracy to help elect Hillary in 2016. Yes, a conspiracy wrapped in an enigma, inside another conspiracy…

[continues at Salon]

, ,

  • BuzzCoastin

    “the truth” is irrelevant
    it’s the macinations of mercenaries
    people squabbling over oil & money

    btw: the nyt is a lying gruberment whore
    untrustworthy for anything but elite spin

  • InfvoCuernos

    What about Hillary’s “vast right wing conspiracy”? I guess we’re ramping up the party polarization for the next election cycle-seems a tad early for that to me tho.

  • Dingbert

    When the Syrian Civil War is over and/or when James Clapper says it’s OK.

  • http://politicalfilm.wordpress.com/ polfilmblog

    And what was that CIA station doing in Benghazi in the first place? Why aren’t we hearing about sending fighters over to Libya? It may not occur to Salon, Alternet and other Obama loyalists, but overthrowing Qadaffi by helping these guys was a war crime, a clear breach of the UN Charter. Same goes for Syria. Of course when US presidents do it, it isn’t illegal. Ask Nixon.

21
More in Benghazi, Conspiracy Theories
What’s the Difference Between a Whistleblower and a Mad Conspiracy Theorist?

Satirist Brendan O'Neill continues the theme of the day – whistleblowers - in this essay for the Telegraph: What's the difference between a whistleblower and a conspiracy theorist? Sometimes it...

Close