The U.S. Mission in Benghazi convened an “emergency meeting” less than a month before the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, because Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a “coordinated attack,” according to a classified cable reviewed by Fox News.
Summarizing an Aug. 15 emergency meeting convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Aug. 16 cable marked “SECRET” said that the State Department’s senior security officer, also known as the RSO, did not believe the consulate could be protected.
“RSO (Regional Security Officer) expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound,” the cable said.
According to a review of the cable addressed to the Office of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Emergency Action Committee was also briefed "on the location of approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps within Benghazi … these groups ran the spectrum from Islamist militias, such as the QRF Brigade and Ansar al-Sharia, to ‘Takfirist thugs.’” Each U.S. mission has a so-called Emergency Action Committee that is responsible for security measures and emergency planning.
The details in the cable seemed to foreshadow the deadly Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. compound, which was a coordinated, commando-style assault using direct and indirect fire. Al Qaeda in North Africa and Ansar al-Sharia, both mentioned in the cable, have since been implicated in the consulate attack.
In addition to describing the security situation in Benghazi as “trending negatively,” the cable said explicitly that the mission would ask for more help. “In light of the uncertain security environment, US Mission Benghazi will submit specific requests to US Embassy Tripoli for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs by separate cover.”
As for specific threats against the U.S., the cable warned the intelligence was not clear on the issue, cautioning that the militias in Benghazi were not concerned with any significant retaliation from the Libyan government, which had apparently lost control in Benghazi. A briefer explained that they “did not have information suggesting that these entities were targeting Americans but did caveat that (there was not) a complete picture of their intentions yet. RSO (Regional Security Officer) noted that the Benghazi militias have become more brazen in their actions and have little fear of reprisal from the (government of Libya.)”

danivon wrote:I can't get to the meat of that WSJ article without registering, but I have seen reports elsewhere which include a timeline of events on the night. It seems that State, Defence and the CIA all had responsibility for various aspects of this. I wonder if the presence of a sensitive covert CIA facility nearby had any bearing on the security provision.

Fox News this morning reports that cables from the consulate itself made clear that they expected an attack from local militia groups in the hours before the terrorist attack that claimed the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. They also told the State Department that they had reason to believe their local security was gathering intel for the attack

Under pressure from senators, the State Department is allowing some lawmakers to look at cables and other documents related to the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, but only today and tomorrow, when most senators are not in Washington. …

“To facilitate your committee’s work, we want to offer you and other members of the committee the opportunity to review these cables and memoranda. This set of material contains classified and other sensitive information… Mindful of these concerns, the Department is prepared to make copies of these documents available for the committee’s in camera review.”

One senior GOP Senate staffer told The Cable that State is only making the documents available for senators and committee staff to view today and tomorrow, which won’t actually allow the members to prepare for the hearing. Staffers for committee members are also not allowed to see the material.

“Funny since no member is in town,” the aide said. “The timing and limited access clearly demonstrates the administration cares more about playing politics with the tragedy than accepting responsibility.”

danivon wrote:I assume that the 2/3 of the Senate not up for election could be there, and as they are in post until the end of the year, probably even the remaining third could be as well.

I also would hope that all of the committee members would have known the session dates in advance and so would already have decided whether to attend or not. The wider Senate may not be there, but wouldn't be in the in camera review session anyway.

The search for mountain-sized molehills continues apace though.

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:I assume that the 2/3 of the Senate not up for election could be there, and as they are in post until the end of the year, probably even the remaining third could be as well.

They are currently in recess.

Meh. They get a couple of days notice and they're supposed to drop their real lives and fly back to DC?

The search for mountain-sized molehills continues apace though.

Molehills?

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:I assume that the 2/3 of the Senate not up for election could be there, and as they are in post until the end of the year, probably even the remaining third could be as well.

They are currently in recess.

Really? I just looked up the Congressional Calendar for 2012. The House is in recess (has been since Oct 8 and returns on Nov 13), but the Senate is in session, having only had the 6 Nov off since Oct 8.

Please keep making assertions of fact that can be quickly checked and found to be false. It's such fun seeing how quickly I can find the evidence to disprove it.

Meh. They get a couple of days notice and they're supposed to drop their real lives and fly back to DC?

Seeing as the Senate is in session, and that as part of their 'real lives' they are paid at least $174,000 a year to do the job of 'being a Senator', I rather think they are supposed to fly to DC, if they aren't already there.

Especially if it is so important to see these documents, which I guess you think it is.

The Senate will hold a pro forma session every Tuesday and Friday until Nov. 13 at 2 p.m. when they’ll continue work on S. 3525, the Sportsmen Act, which would increase access to federal land for hunters and fishers while also supporting conservation measures.

It is terrible that people were killed, but I doubt that this decision was the cause of it, what with it being a procedural matter a couple of months afterwards.

Doctor Fate wrote:Nicely skipping over the heart of the matter: why the limit?

If the Administration values the truth, why confine Senators to two days? Will the documents self-destruct after the 48 hours is up?