A fuller accounting of the attacks suggests lessons for the United States that go well beyond Libya. It shows the risks of expecting American aid in a time of desperation to buy durable loyalty, and the difficulty of discerning friends from allies of convenience in a culture shaped by decades of anti-Western sentiment. Both are challenges now hanging over the American involvement in Syria’s civil conflict.

dag hammarsjkold wrote:Interesting article with maps of the attacks...

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/?hp#/?chapt=0

But according to Joscelyn, “several U.S. intelligence officials have told THE WEEKLY STANDARD that multiple al Qaeda-affiliated groups and individuals are suspected of playing a direct role.” Moreover, “members of the House Intelligence Committee have received numerous briefings on Benghazi from the U.S. intelligence community.” The Committee chairman, Mike Rogers, continues to assert that al Qaeda-affiliated groups and individuals are suspected of playing a direct role.

Finally, the WSJ has reported that “U.S. intelligence officials identified operatives from [Jamal's] network at the scene of the fatal attack at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.” Thus, Kirkpatrick’s claim that everybody “in the U.S. intelligence business” agrees with him is bogus.

If this isn’t a smoking gun on Benghazi, at least on the controversy over the talking points that blamed a YouTube video rather than the terrorists who plotted and then conducted the attack, then it’s not clear what would qualify. Judicial Watch forced the release of additional White House e-mails relating to the evolution of the talking points and finds a rather bald-faced admission of Obama administration interests in Susan Rice’s television appearances the following Sunday. The YouTube story was designed to distract from “policy failures,” according to Barack Obama’s aide Ben Rhodes:

Multiple anonymous sources reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was used by CIA as a cover to smuggle weapons from Libya to anti-Assad rebels in Syria.[28][22]:56[29][26][30] Seymour Hersh cites a source among intelligence officials, saying The consulate’s only mission was to provide cover for the moving of arms. It had no real political role. The attack allegedly brought end to active US involvement, but did not stop the smuggling.[31] In January 2014, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence reported that "All CIA activities in Benghazi were legal and authorized. On-the-record testimony establishes that CIA was not sending weapons (including MANPADS) from Libya to Syria, or facilitating other organizations or states that were transferring weapons from Libya to Syria."[32]

rickyp wrote:Everyone knows the reason for the Benghazi mission Fate. It was cover for a CIA operation. Doesn't Darryl Issa know how to use Wikipedia?

During former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Rand Paul asked her if the U.S. was involved in any way in the transfer of weapons from Libya to Turkey.

“To Turkey? . . . Nobody’s ever raised that with me,” Clinton responded. When Paul asked whether the annex, the installation to which Americans fled on the night of the Benghazi attack, was involved, she said, “Senator, you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. I do not know.”

And the reason for any confusion was that there wasn't much communication between the CIA and State....
The notion that there is anything more than interdepartmental finger pointing to this is silly. Since the only people genuinely interested in this are Fox and some republican hardliners .... its not going to amount to anything.

Be cautious. You may have to indict Hillary for lying to Congress:

During former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Rand Paul asked her if the U.S. was involved in any way in the transfer of weapons from Libya to Turkey.

“To Turkey? . . . Nobody’s ever raised that with me,” Clinton responded. When Paul asked whether the annex, the installation to which Americans fled on the night of the Benghazi attack, was involved, she said, “Senator, you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. I do not know

Well, if it's all just "silly finger-pointing," then do please tell me how it is possible that this consulate in an area known to be growing in terrorist activity, where the Brits and Red Cross had fled, and which had been attacked twice, was protected by local security?

How is it possible that there was no contingency to respond militarily on 9/11 in light of knowing AQ's predilection for attacking on "special dates?"

Why were requests for additional security turned down?

CAIRO — In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government officials told McClatchy.
Why Stevens, who died of smoke inhalation in the first of two attacks that took place late Sept. 11 and early Sept. 12, 2012, would turn down the offers remains unclear. The deteriorating security situation in Benghazi had been the subject of a meeting that embassy officials held Aug. 15, where they concluded they could not defend the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi. The next day, the embassy drafted a cable outlining the dire circumstances and saying it would spell out what it needed in a separate cable.

Why wasn't the President in the situation room?

What was more important than the first American Ambassador being murdered in more than 30 years

What steps were taken to ensure the arms sent to Syria didn't wind up in the hands of terrorists?

Oh, and why not just cooperate with Congress if there's nothing to hide?

The main Republican critique appears to be that the White House and State Department politicized talking points given to U.N Ambassador Susan Rice, who spoke about the attacks on American TV five days later. Republicans argue the White House deliberately downplayed the involvement of al Qaeda and played up the spontaneous nature of the protests as a reaction to an anti-Islam video, to avoid tarnishing President Obama's national security record in advance of the 2012 presidential election. This, despite the fact that the White House talking points matched those produced by the CIA.

rickyp wrote:

Be cautious. You may have to indict Hillary for lying to Congress:

During former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Rand Paul asked her if the U.S. was involved in any way in the transfer of weapons from Libya to Turkey.

“To Turkey? . . . Nobody’s ever raised that with me,” Clinton responded. When Paul asked whether the annex, the installation to which Americans fled on the night of the Benghazi attack, was involved, she said, “Senator, you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. I do not know

.”
How is she lying? She's referred him to the CIA.... At the point of this inquest the CIA mission was still (and probably still is) classified...

fate

Well, if it's all just "silly finger-pointing," then do please tell me how it is possible that this consulate in an area known to be growing in terrorist activity, where the Brits and Red Cross had fled, and which had been attacked twice, was protected by local security?

All embasseys (sic) around the world have as their primary protection force, local security. As a "standard" consulate to do differently would draw suspicion. And the CIA in the Annex, were using the consulate as cover ...

fate

How is it possible that there was no contingency to respond militarily on 9/11 in light of knowing AQ's predilection for attacking on "special dates?"

CIA intelligence failure.
Kind of like 9/11 ...

Besides, there was a protection force in the Annex, which successfully protected the Annex staff and the couple of State employees who had travelled (sic) with Christopher...There was CIA response team that arrived to successfully evacuate almost all of the staff. The only two casualties after the consulate was hit were CIA security men doing their job....
As a military exercise the evacuation of the Annex was a success.

fate

Why were requests for additional security turned down?

CAIRO — In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government officials told McClatchy.
Why Stevens, who died of smoke inhalation in the first of two attacks that took place late Sept. 11 and early Sept. 12, 2012, would turn down the offers remains unclear. The deteriorating security situation in Benghazi had been the subject of a meeting that embassy officials held Aug. 15, where they concluded they could not defend the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi. The next day, the embassy drafted a cable outlining the dire circumstances and saying it would spell out what it needed in a separate cable.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/1 ... itary.html

The deteriorating security situation in Benghazi had been the subject of a meeting that embassy officials held Aug. 15, where they concluded they could not defend the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi.

fate

Why wasn't the President in the situation room?

Why would he be there? To personally manage the evacuation of the Annex which was being expertly and successfully carried out by CIA professionals?
Thats just stupid.

Fate

What was more important than the first American Ambassador being murdered in more than 30 years

?
By your reasoning Bush should have spent the entire 8 years of his term hunkered down in the situation room while American soldiers and some diplomats risked their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq....

The event in Benghazi was unanticipated. Thank you CIA intelligence.

Fate

What steps were taken to ensure the arms sent to Syria didn't wind up in the hands of terrorists?

Thats (sic) a good question. ut (sic) not one that was asked at the hearings. Because everyone would have been forced to deny knowledge ot (sic) it.

Fate

Oh, and why not just cooperate with Congress if there's nothing to hide?

How many hearings have been held?

and still:

The main Republican critique appears to be that the White House and State Department politicized talking points given to U.N Ambassador Susan Rice, who spoke about the attacks on American TV five days later. Republicans argue the White House deliberately downplayed the involvement of al Qaeda and played up the spontaneous nature of the protests as a reaction to an anti-Islam video, to avoid tarnishing President Obama's national security record in advance of the 2012 presidential election. This, despite the fact that the White House talking points matched those produced by the CIA.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/06/opinion/k ... ghazi-gop/

Attkisson: When you run across apparent inconsistencies like that, we don’t exactly know what’s behind it, but it certainly does raise a red flag covering the story as a journalist. As you said, Mike Morrell, the former deputy director of the CIA, testified last month before Congress, in written testimony and his verbal testimony that the White House did not make any substantive changes nor request any changes, and, in fact, he echoed what Jay Carney, the White House spokesman, said all along, which is the only change the White House made was changing “consulate” to “diplomatic post.” But if what Tommy Vietor said on Fox Thursday is correct, it’s directly at odds with those proclamations from the other Obama officials.

You might as well ask why Obama won't release his birth certificate...

CIA or no CIA, how could State not have anticipated it?

rickyp wrote:fate

CIA or no CIA, how could State not have anticipated it?

What is the role of the CIA in this Fate? Their role is providing intelligence is it not? Aren't they the people who should have provided ample warning...

*In April 2012, two former security guards for the consulate threw a homemade "fish bomb" IED over the consulate fence; the incident did not cause any casualties.[33]

*Just 4 days later, a similar bomb was thrown at a four vehicle convoy carrying the United Nations Special Envoy to Libya, exploding just 12 feet from the UN envoy's vehicle without injuring anyone.[34]

*In May 2012 an Al-Qaida affiliate calling itself the Imprisoned Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades claimed responsibility for an attack on the International Red Cross (ICRC) office in Benghazi.

*On August 6 the ICRC suspended operations in Benghazi. The head of the ICRC's delegation in Libya said the aid group was "appalled" by the attack and "extremely concerned" about escalating violence in Libya.[35]

*The Imprisoned Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades released a video of what it said was its detonation of an explosive device outside the gates of the U.S. consulate on June 5, which caused no casualties but damaged the consulate's perimeter wall,[36][37] described by one individual as "big enough for forty men to go through."[38] The Brigades claimed that the attack was in response to the killing of Abu Yahya al Libi, a Libyan al-Qaeda leader who had just died in an American drone attack, and was also timed to coincide with the imminent arrival of a U.S. diplomat.[39][40] There were no injuries, but the group left behind leaflets promising more attacks against the U.S.[41]

*British ambassador to Libya Dominic Asquith survived an assassination attempt in Benghazi on June 10. Two British protection officers were injured in the attack when their convoy was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade 300 yards from their consulate office.[42]

*The British Foreign Office withdrew all consular staff from Benghazi in late June.[43][44][45]

*On June 18, 2012, the Tunisian consulate in Benghazi was stormed by individuals affiliated with Ansar Al-Sharia Libya, allegedly because of "attacks by Tunisian artists against Islam."[22]:31

*On the day of the attack:
*Al Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri declared that al Libi's death still needed to be avenged.[46]
*In Egypt, 2000 Salafist activists protested against the film Innocence of Muslims at 5pm EET (11am EDT) at the US embassy in Cairo.[47]

All but 4 people in Ben Ghazi were CIA, and they could have insisted that Christopher stay in the Annex or even leave the city, They didn't. Or if they did Christopher ignored them.

Christopher, and the other Consulate staffer died because of an intelligence failure. The other two died carrying out their roles as CIA defense contractors in organizing a successful evacuation.
There were certainly failures at Ben Ghazi (sic). But it isn't really politics to aim at the intelligence failures that actually caused the grief.

I suppose Ben Ghazi (sic) is a focus issue again because Obamacare isn't going so well for Republicans....

Why did he ignore them? Did they insist he stay in the Annex?

Both are legitimate lines of inquiry. Thus, we need the select committee

freeman3 wrote:Two things I heard on the radio this morning: Republicans complaining about the IRS, Obamacare, the VA, the IRS and Benghazi. It would be news if they didn't...Christians: telling people what to do since 1 AD...

There were Christians in 1 CE (AD) or is that part of the joke?