Emails show U.S. officials told of militants within hours of Benghazi attack
8 replies, posted
[QUOTE]The [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/barack-obama/"]Obama administration[/URL] downplayed Wednesday the significance of newly revealed email that shows senior officials were informed within hours of the Sept. 11 attack on the [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/us-consulate/"]U.S. Consulate[/URL] in Benghazi, [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/libya/"]Libya[/URL], that an Islamist group with ties to [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/al-qaeda/"]al Qaeda[/URL] had claimed responsibility for the assault.
The email alerted officials at the [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/white-house/"]White House[/URL], [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/federal-bureau-of-investigation/"]FBI[/URL] and [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/department-of-state/"]State Department[/URL] that the Libyan extremist group Ansar al-Sharia had “claimed responsibility on [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/facebook/"]Facebook[/URL] and [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/twitter/"]Twitter[/URL]” for the attack. Administration officials said it was just part the initial scramble of communications about the attack.
“Hosting something on [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/facebook/"]Facebook[/URL] is not, in and of itself, evidence,” Secretary of State [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/hillary-rodham-clinton/"]Hillary Rodham Clinton[/URL] told reporters after the email was leaked to news outlets and posted on the Internet Wednesday. “I think it just underscores how fluid the reporting was at the time and contended for some time.”
Her assertion matched that of [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/white-house/"]White House[/URL] press secretary [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/jay-carney/"]Jay Carney[/URL], who said “there were emails about all sorts of information that was coming available in the aftermath of the attack.”
[URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/jay-carney/"]Mr. Carney[/URL] noted that within a few hours Ansar al-Sharia had “itself claimed that it had not been responsible — neither should be taken as fact.”
Meanwhile, the [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/tunisian-government/"]Tunisian government[/URL] confirmed Wednesday that it has arrested a 28-year-old Tunisian reportedly linked to the [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/us-consulate/"]U.S. consulate[/URL] attack, The Associated Press reported.
[URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/tunisian-interior-ministry/"]Tunisian Interior Ministry[/URL] spokesman [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/tarrouch-khaled/"]Tarrouch Khaled[/URL] said Wednesday that [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/ali-harzi/"]Ali Harzi[/URL] was in custody in Tunis.
The [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/department-of-state/"]State Department[/URL] had no comment, the AP reported.
News that an email about the group was circulated among administration officials on the night of the attack is likely to amplify an already politically heated debate in Washington over why the [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/white-house/"]White House[/URL] was initially unwilling to characterize the incident as one plotted by Islamic extremists.
Although President Obama used the words “acts of terror” when describing the attack in prepared remarks on Sept. 12, other officials maintained in ensuing days that the assault — by heavily armed men with mortar support — had grown out of a spontaneous protest against an American-made video disparaging Islam’s Prophet Muhammad.
Some analysts, meanwhile, cited confusion Wednesday over the initial email that was circulated among administration officials on the night of the consulate attack, in which U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed.
The email focused on Ansar al-Sharia, an Arabic name that means “supporters of Islamic law” and is believed to be used by [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/al-qaeda/"]al Qaeda[/URL] supporters in [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/libya/"]Libya[/URL] and other parts of the Middle East.
[URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/aaron-zelin/"]Aaron Zelin[/URL], a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who monitors Arabic-language websites tied to extremist groups in the region, said he had no record of any direct claim of responsibility by Ansar al-Sharia that night.
“I was following that specific [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/facebook/"]Facebook[/URL] page very closely because this was considered to be the official page of Ansar al-Sharia, and I don’t have any archived record of that posting at that time,” he said, adding that the email’s authors “could have been mistaken or they could be referring to something else completely.”
He said that on Sept. 12 — several hours after the initial email had circulated among [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/barack-obama/"]Obama administration[/URL] officials — Ansar al-Sharia made a [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/facebook/"]Facebook[/URL] posting in which it said that it had not ordered the attack in Benghazi.
“They said that they were not involved in an official manner but they applauded the attack,” said [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/aaron-zelin/"]Mr. Zelin[/URL], who added that the [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/facebook/"]Facebook[/URL] page for the group has since been removed from the Internet.
[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://en.ria.ru/world/20121024/176884536.html"]http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/24/emails-us-officials-militants-hours-benghazi/?page=all#pagebreak
[url]http://en.ria.ru/world/20121024/176884536.html[/url]
[/URL]
//
Um didn't we all hear about this within hours of the attack?
It was an inside job
There, we got that out of the way. Now let those crazy naive bunch try to disprove that
Receive emails within hours, blame it on YouTube.
Makes sense to me.
This wouldn't have happened if we still used myspace.
Sarah Palin telling how it is
I don't understand what the big deal is.
Why would you believe the first thing you heard as trusted and reliable fact? AFAIK this isn't exactly an unreasonable response. It's not like they waited a few weeks to send troops to protect the embassy or anything.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;38172804]I don't understand what the big deal is.
Why would you believe the first thing you heard as trusted and reliable fact? AFAIK this isn't exactly an unreasonable response. It's not like they waited a few weeks to send troops to protect the embassy or anything.[/QUOTE]
Republicans are pissed at it because the administration made an effort to make it sound like it was all because of the video in the days and weeks after the attack, despite everyone knowing the video had nothing to do with it from the start. So they're trying to use this as fuel to get people not to vote for Obama. Whether or not you feel this is a big deal, is up to you.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.