Bombshell: US knew Stevens assassination was work of terrorists within 24 hours of attack

posted at 9:21 am on September 26, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Five days after the attack on the Benghazi consulate that left four Americans dead, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, the Obama administration sent UN Ambassador Susan Rice onto five Sunday talk shows to insist that the sacking of the consulate was the result of a protest over a YouTube video that “spun out of control.”  The government of Libya was already scoffing at that story, and by the end of the next week the White House began reluctantly admitting that terrorists had attacked the diplomatic mission.  Today, however, Eli Lake reports for the Daily Beast that the Obama administration knew within 24 hours that the attack had not been a spontaneous event, but a well-planned terrorist attack:

Within 24 hours of the 9-11 anniversary attack on the United States consulate in Benghazi, U.S. intelligence agencies had strong indications al Qaeda–affiliated operatives were behind the attack, and had even pinpointed the location of one of those attackers. Three separate U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast said the early information was enough to show that the attack was planned and the work of al Qaeda affiliates operating in Eastern Libya. …

The intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast did so anonymously because they weren’t authorized to speak to the press. They said U.S. intelligence agencies developed leads on four of the participants of the attacks within 24 hours of the fire fight that took place mainly at an annex near the Benghazi consulate. For one of those individuals, the U.S. agencies were able to find his location after his use of social media. “We had two kinds of intelligence on one guy,” this official said. “We believe we had enough to target him.”

Another U.S. intelligence official said, “There was very good information on this in the first 24 hours. These guys have a return address. There are camps of people and a wide variety of things we could do.”

A spokesman for the National Security Council declined to comment for the story. But another U.S. intelligence official said, “I can’t get into specific numbers but soon after the attack we had a pretty good bead on some individuals involved in the attack.”

In other words, either Susan Rice lied to the press, or was lied to by the Obama administration and sent out to the press deliberately.  That leaves the national media in a quandry.  Clearly, with only a couple of exceptions, the media hasn’t wanted to address the implications of a successful terrorist attack on an American diplomatic installation … at least not during the Barack Obama presidency.  Now it’s becoming very clear that the administration didn’t just tell them to “f*** off,” the White House actively lied about the attack in order to deflect further questions from the media.

Will national news organizations begin to demand answers about who told Rice to tell that story, and why?  Or will they continue the pattern of last week, in which the media suddenly developed a keen interest in economic policy when the White House narrative on Benghazi began collapsing?  I’m pretty sure I know which way I’m betting.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

The President Surreal Administration

Conservative4Ever on September 26, 2012 at 11:39 AM

The media will do whatever they are told to do, by the Obama administration;just like they have been doing all along.

MikeA on September 26, 2012 at 11:36 AM

That was confirmed when Obama posted an obviously forged birth certificate last year.

faraway on September 26, 2012 at 11:39 AM

BTW the number of drone strikes under Dear Leader has increased 5 times over the number while Chimpy was President. Just sayin’.

Del Dolemonte on September 26, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Indeed because his Islamic faith assures them Paradise if he kills them. But if a future President captured they they would go to hell most likely.

Killing them also promotes himself thus making it more likely he can institute Sharia Law in America.

Islam promises Obama great blessing for these actions.

Steveangell on September 26, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Obama himself called for this.

No one at this point should doubt Obama is a Jihadist Muslim. He practices Jihad in politically changing America. Who knew he meant Change to Sharia Law in America?

Steveangell on September 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Obama is not a Muslim or a jihadi (I think he’s probably an atheist). He’s a multiculturalist who will roll over for radicals. Just look at Europe where idiots of his ilk have taken the same approach to Islam.

gwelf on September 26, 2012 at 11:42 AM

But just watch.

The folks here think Mitt should be loved by every one that post here.

Steveangell on September 26, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Get a grip…accepted over Obama, that’s our choice and your choice…Obama or Mitt.

I choose Mitt, hands down, no question, without hesitation, unequivocally, I don’t care how much I like or dislike him, I detest Obama more.

It’s not even a “choice between two evils”, it’s a choice between evil and the correct path…not the correct destination, but the corrected path.

right2bright on September 26, 2012 at 11:42 AM

the government regularly feigns ignorance about what terrorism-related information it possesses. the cia, for example, continues to refuse to confirm or deny the covert military use of drones to kill suspected terrorists. does it bother you that they’re obviously lying?

sesquipedalian on September 26, 2012 at 10:38 AM

That’s a lie. Sure, they don’t tell you about terrorist cells they know about or how they got their info, etc. They don’t regularly lie to the U.S. public about whether something was or wasn’t a terrorist attack. This admin is the first to do that. Because it hurts Obamidiot’s image. He was supposed to make the Islamists love us by his very existence. He was supposed to bring “smart diplomacy” which would solve all the world’s problems. All he has done is harm us in every way imaginable. A bigger liar and idiot as president one could not find in fiction.

Is there no lie, no dishonesty, no incompetence that a democrat can commit that you will not blindly support?

Monkeytoe on September 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM

BTW the number of drone strikes under Dear Leader has increased 5 times over the number while Chimpy was President. Just sayin’.

Del Dolemonte on September 26, 2012 at 11:32 AM

You can see how upset Code Pinko’s are…

right2bright on September 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Remember when the left mocked Bush for years for not “getting” OBL?

Now we have a President overseeing an intelligence operation wherein we knew the location of some of the Bastards of Benghazi and we did what exactly?

Cowardice.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on September 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM

OT:

As we all thought – Barely five seconds after the official deadline and McCaskill lets the dogs slip:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57520587-503544/in-new-ad-mccaskill-hits-akin-for-legitimate-rape-comment/

Hope Akin and his lunatic wife enjoy the ride from here on out.

JFS61 on September 26, 2012 at 11:44 AM

In other words, either Susan Rice lied to the press, or was lied to by the Obama administration and sent out to the press deliberately.

No Way…..!

Will national news organizations begin to demand answers about who told Rice to tell that story, and why?

ROTFLMAO!

Tim_CA on September 26, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Rueters quit covering this story..? Why?

d1carter on September 26, 2012 at 11:45 AM

National media, please pick up the red courtesy phone.

Hullo? Hullo?

Mitt Romney farted?

Get right on it…

ROMNEY PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR GLOBAL WARMING!!!!!

No other news today.

Good night.

Bruno Strozek on September 26, 2012 at 11:46 AM

What does Whoopie say about this?

faraway on September 26, 2012 at 11:02 AM

F-r-r-r-p.

slickwillie2001 on September 26, 2012 at 11:47 AM

As we all thought – Barely five seconds after the official deadline and McCaskill lets the dogs slip:

JFS61 on September 26, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Oh my. You mean the enemy fights back?? I’m getting the vapors.

faraway on September 26, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Kingsjester you better save every kleenix for yourself as yet more polls show President Obama winning to the point where Karl Rove is even forced to emphasize how Romney can still lose Ohio and possibly win still . Also as far as denying I know you and your fellow right wingers are experts on denying … as you claim that Every poll is wrong …oh that’s right Rasmussen is right except for the days they have Obama winning …

U2denver on September 26, 2012 at 11:48 AM

O/T (or maybe not?): Everbody (except perhaps on Hot Gas) seems willing to give (or concede) credit to the President as very successful on foreign policy. Killing terrorists with drones is not foreign policy (more like a video game, which is perhaps the source of its appeal to this President), and neither is killing Bin Laden (a national security success, but not “foreign policy”). What has this Administration actually accomplished in foreign policy? Any ideas? The general theme has been propitiate our enemies and p*ss off our allies – what am I missing?

Upstreamer on September 26, 2012 at 11:51 AM

Hillary Clinton’s got Susan Rice by the forarms forcing her to her knees. Susan’s trying to get up, but here comes Valerie Jarret with a flying sidekick to the solar plexus and BAMB Susan is under the bus! Oh let’s get a replay of that last move. Now there’s a bump in the road.
Back to you Ed.

onomo on September 26, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Doesn’t Brian Williams remind you of a Tass rews reader from the 1970s Soviet Union?

bw222 on September 26, 2012 at 11:54 AM

The administration knew within 24 hours that this was a terrorist attack? When most people heard about this event, they remembered the date and knew within 24 seconds that it was a terrorist attack. Epic fail, White House.

joejm65 on September 26, 2012 at 11:54 AM

BTW the number of drone strikes under Dear Leader has increased 5 times over the number while Chimpy was President. Just sayin’.

Del Dolemonte on September 26, 2012 at 11:32 AM

if Obowmao is looking to start another war, he should just come out and say that!

screwauger on September 26, 2012 at 11:56 AM

The surveillance tapes likely now are sitting in the L.A. Times vault,

de rigueur on September 26, 2012 at 11:15 AM

I wouldn’t doubt that for a minute.

Thanks for your opinion.

lynncgb on September 26, 2012 at 11:59 AM

U2denver on September 26, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Polls communicate via landlines. They are also weighted heavily Democrat, in most cases.

Out here in the Heartland, you hardly ever see bumper stickers,yard signs, or any show of support for your “messiah”. Instead, there is an anger and righteous indignatio building…and a deire to vote out of office,a Manchurian President who seems to have more in common with President Ahmedinejad than he does with any US President, except for Carter, who shares in Obama’s Dhimmitude.

Sure stinks to be you. I’ll order another box of Kleenex or you for November 6th.

kingsjester on September 26, 2012 at 12:00 PM

What does Whoopie say about this?

faraway on September 26, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Whoopie says, “It’s not terrorism terrorism.”

bw222 on September 26, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Please let’s stop referring to the Obama propagandaa ministry as “the national news media.”

Obama Propaganda Ministry has a nice ring to it, and can easily fit into the alphabet soup that is federal agencies.

Nutstuyu on September 26, 2012 at 12:03 PM

The surveillance tapes likely now are sitting in the L.A. Times vault,

de rigueur on September 26, 2012 at 11:15 AM
I wouldn’t doubt that for a minute.

Thanks for your opinion.

lynncgb on September 26, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Why is no one able to break in and expose them? Where are all the good mafia guys that could’ve so easily exposed a judge’s boy-love tendencies back in the day?

Nutstuyu on September 26, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Obama is not a Muslim or a jihadi (I think he’s probably an atheist). He’s a multiculturalist who will roll over for radicals. Just look at Europe where idiots of his ilk have taken the same approach to Islam.

gwelf on September 26, 2012 at 11:42 AM

How would you know? Madonna just confirmed he is a Black Muslim. So he may not be in the realm of an Arab Muslim, but he’s certainly in the Farrakan Muslim camp.

Nutstuyu on September 26, 2012 at 12:08 PM

I’m just at wits end here, now.

This Presidency cannot be allowed to continue – and there’s a high possibility this treasonous f@#$ will actually be re-elected.

We’re running out of options.

Midas on September 26, 2012 at 12:12 PM

O/T (or maybe not?): Everbody (except perhaps on Hot Gas) seems willing to give (or concede) credit to the President as very successful on foreign policy. Killing terrorists with drones is not foreign policy (more like a video game, which is perhaps the source of its appeal to this President), and neither is killing Bin Laden (a national security success, but not “foreign policy”). What has this Administration actually accomplished in foreign policy? Any ideas? The general theme has been propitiate our enemies and p*ss off our allies – what am I missing?

Upstreamer on September 26, 2012 at 11:51 AM

This is so true, I never made the connection until you posted this. What exactly is the Obama Doctrine? We may have had successes in National Security and capturing/killing terrorists, but what have we done to better our standing with other nations/allies? Our standing with other countries and governments is what Foreign Policy really is. I have only seem Obama sucking up to those governments who are not friendly to us, while sticking it to the governments/leaders who are friendly to us. How is this supposedly a success?

weaselyone on September 26, 2012 at 12:12 PM

The new Libyan president is more honest and smarter than Obama.

If Obama should win, God forbid, his arrogance would be beyond the limit, which he has reached a long time ago.

Consider a global tax something that will hit you with certainty.

“Fund your Utopia without me” — Resist We Much

Schadenfreude on September 26, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Rice is a cow.

Hillary is a cow.

Otherwise they wouldn’t have ruined their ‘reputation’ over this oaf.

Schadenfreude on September 26, 2012 at 12:22 PM

There are several aspects to this not commented upon so far:

1) The Daily Beast is not run by Karl Rove last time I checked. Isn’t it curious they are being ostensibly critical of the SCOAMF’s cover-up? Isn’t there a civil war internal to the SCOAMF’s administration people might be interested in reading?

2) The U.N. Ambassador posting is well up the classified information food chain. There is NO room for speculation on “what did Rice know and when did she know it”. If our intelligence personnel knew within 24 hours, she knew within 25 hours. An easy question – Does the U.N. Ambassador report to the Secretary of State in the Obama Administration? Or does she report to Valerie Jarrett?

3) Parse out the two separate pieces of this quote from The Daily Beast:

It’s unclear whether any of these suspected attackers have been targeted or arrested, and intelligence experts caution that these are still early days in a complex investigation.

The part in bold comes from the “He’s not ready for the 3:00 AM call.” crowd. If you’ll remember, the SCOAMF and his mistress (B&D not Blue Dress type) had to face an open revolt before they would target Bin Laden. The part in italics comes from the Golfer-in-Chief’s people. I don’t want to see Shrillery as President but I also don’t doubt she would have ordered a counter strike one second after being told, “We know where the bad guys are sitting right now.”

4) For those of you looking for a bumper sticker, here you go:

People die, Obama lies. It’s all just bumps in road.

5) ED/AP/MKH – Nice site you USED to have here. It gets worse everyday you let the Axel-trolls run free to fling poo and shout “SQUIRREL!” … You know exactly who they are and could ban hammer 90% of them for consistently going off topic – why not be the adults and toss out the trash?

The other 10% are certifiable loons who have said despicable and untrue things. When I get sick of one of them, I post one of his more despicable posts for the edification of any new readers who might be fooled by a bout of temporary sanity. Like the Axel-trolls, the loons are EASY to spot by the number of posts they make with untrue statements in them, followed by the number of regular commenters who try to counter their spew. Do you really need the page hits they generate SO badly?

PolAgnostic on September 26, 2012 at 12:26 PM

The posters at the daily beast are defending obama natch

cmsinaz on September 26, 2012 at 9:38 AM
…somehow an “s” fell off your last word!

KOOLAID2 on September 26, 2012 at 9:46 AM

I see what you did there……. :D

wolfplus3 on September 26, 2012 at 12:34 PM

I knew it immediately. Maybe they should hire me.

The Rogue Tomato on September 26, 2012 at 12:35 PM

PolAgnostic on September 26, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Some telling points indeed.

spiritof61 on September 26, 2012 at 12:45 PM

23 hours is 24 hours too long.

They should have known before it happened, fools.

Schadenfreude on September 26, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Hillary knew DURING the attack. The Ambassador would have been communicating with them during the attack in order to get backup.

faraway on September 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM

the government regularly feigns ignorance about what terrorism-related information it possesses. the cia, for example, continues to refuse to confirm or deny the covert military use of drones to kill suspected terrorists. does it bother you that they’re obviously lying?

sesquipedalian on September 26, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Assuming arguendo that what you are saying is true, the real question is, does it bother you? In follow up, if not, why not?

totherightofthem on September 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM

@U@denver … he might win, and God help us all if that happens. But just study history, and you’ll see that it’s not in the bag. The situation in ’80 was similar – wretched economy, international upheaval – and Carter was ahead into October. So, how did that turn out?
Guess your one of the 47%, huh?

mel23059 on September 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM

BTW the number of drone strikes under Dear Leader has increased 5 times over the number while Chimpy was President. Just sayin’.

Del Dolemonte on September 26, 2012 at 11:32 AM

If you look at it in terms of global strategy, killing OBL and the drone strikes actually SAVE Muslim and Taliban lives.

If they were allowed to run wild and do another mass murder of Americans, the POTUS may have no choice and the response might be terrible.

Is there any truth to the rumor that the Obama Propaganda Ministry ( western news reporting apparatus ) is putting Romney on a “speak only when spoken to status”?

OPM, I love it.

IlikedAUH2O on September 26, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Obama, liar in chief
Biden, vice liar in chief, on a good day puts the boss to shame
Rice, first deputy liar in chief, jumped over several worthy rivals

burt on September 26, 2012 at 1:12 PM

The media will do whatever they are told to do, by the Obama administration;just like they have been doing all along.

MikeA on September 26, 2012 at 11:36 AM

That was confirmed when Obama posted an obviously forged birth certificate last year.

faraway on September 26, 2012 at 11:39 AM

I can one up you and say this was confirmed during the 2008 elections. Think of all the skeletons they could have played with yet chose not to… unless, of course, the candidate with said skeletons had an “R” behind their names.

Just another reason in the already immeasurable list of why the sooner the “legacy media” is treated with the scorn and derision they deserve the better.

Their incompetence and malpractice has moved from economic suffering and lives ruined to death.

kim roy on September 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM

The situation in ’80 was similar – wretched economy, international upheaval – and Carter was ahead into October. So, how did that turn out?
Guess your one of the 47%, huh?

mel23059 on September 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Obama is more like FDR than lke Carter. How did 36, 40, and, 44 turn out?

burt on September 26, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Nutstuyu on September 26, 2012 at 12:03 PM

O P M Hey I like that! Very appropriate.

Herb on September 26, 2012 at 1:21 PM

So, who should be resigning immediately?

Midas on September 26, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Today, however, Eli Lake reports for the Daily Beast that the Obama administration knew within 24 hours that the attack had not been a spontaneous event, but a well-planned terrorist attack

Romney, Ed, you, and I deduced that within a couple of hours of hearing about it. At east some of us were and are sure that it had to happen on the eleventh. The assassinatons were an add on benefit.

burt on September 26, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Obama is not a Muslim or a jihadi (I think he’s probably an atheist). He’s a multiculturalist who will roll over for radicals. Just look at Europe where idiots of his ilk have taken the same approach to Islam.

gwelf on September 26, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Right.

Barry decided to change his name to a Muslim name for no reason.

Barry sought out a Islam/Christian Church for no reason.

Barry stopped wearing his watch and wedding ring during Ramadan for no reason.

Barry praised the Islamic prayer song for no reason.

Madonna and numerous other liberals consider Obama Muslim for no reason.

Barry considers an video on Islam just as offensive as killing our people because of that. Killing Coptic Christians no different than making a video about Islam.

But no no no. Barry is not a Muslim.

Give me a break. If it looks like a Duck and quacks like a Duck it is a Duck.

Steveangell on September 26, 2012 at 1:39 PM

I do not believe the polls….. Are there that many stupid people in this country? If so, I am not surprised at what is happening to us.

ultracon on September 26, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Rueters quit covering this story..? Why?

d1carter on September 26, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Well, for one reason, there were significant errors in that Reuters story.

For example, there were NO MARINES in the country of Libya at the time of the attack on September 11th.

Zero.

The two security guys who were killed — Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty –were former active duty SEALs (both in their early 40s) who were not assigned to Consulate security, but who were there as private security consultants, and they tried to help to defend the place when it suddenly came under attack.

Trochilus on September 26, 2012 at 2:03 PM

This is what happens when you can’t admit you’re wrong and you can’t admit your opponents are never right.

Now Americans are dead.

billrowe on September 26, 2012 at 2:05 PM

. . .
The assassinatons were an add on benefit.

burt on September 26, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Do you realize how bad that sounds? Would you please explain what you really meant?

Trochilus on September 26, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Trochilus on September 26, 2012 at 2:03 PM

So, the story of the squad of eight Marines arriving by helicopter from Tripoli was just a hoax? Another Reuters reporter filed a similar story that is still up on the Reuters site..?

d1carter on September 26, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Trochilus on September 26, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Were there no injured/wounded evacuated..?

d1carter on September 26, 2012 at 2:44 PM

All despicable obama and his disgusting thug administration do is lie, and the media lies right along with him.

jqc1970 on September 26, 2012 at 3:16 PM

There are several aspects to this not commented upon so far:

1) The Daily Beast is not run by Karl Rove last time I checked. Isn’t it curious they are being ostensibly critical of the SCOAMF’s cover-up? Isn’t there a civil war internal to the SCOAMF’s administration people might be interested in reading?

2) The U.N. Ambassador posting is well up the classified information food chain. There is NO room for speculation on “what did Rice know and when did she know it”. If our intelligence personnel knew within 24 hours, she knew within 25 hours. An easy question – Does the U.N. Ambassador report to the Secretary of State in the Obama Administration? Or does she report to Valerie Jarrett?
. . . .

PolAgnostic on September 26, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Answer: Valerie Jarrett.

How about this possibility?

As a result of this utter failure on the part of the Sec’y of State to figure out that there was a significant security problem brewing in Libya, an internal war has now broken out between the Clintonites at State, and the Obamaites within the White House.

And, this story may be just one bit of evidence that a game of “chicken” that may have broken out.

ALL embassy security in Libya, up to and including September 11th of this year, was being supplied by Blue Mountain Group, a private British security outfit contracted by Hillary Clinton. The State Department tried to cover that up but finally had to admit it when details of the contract were leaked.

The Administration blamed the attack on a demonstration against the film that was suddenly hijacked by a few gunmen, a story told by Susan Rice on all the “talkies” and which was so obviously bogus that it almost immediately began coming apart.

After two weeks of “denial” and lame cover stories, followed by mile concessions about possible terror links, a well known liberal site, “The Daily Beast” and a long time liberal writer, Eli Lake, suddenly break the explosive story that the Obama Administration, through the intelligence community, knew within 24 hours that the attack on Benghazi consulate and the assassination of the Ambassador and three others, was a planned terrorist operation.

The folks at Foggy Bottom are obviously really on edge about the curiosity of reporters about various embarrassing aspects of this story, especially those that are potentially embarrassing and possibly fatal to Hillary Clinton’s ambitions.

So, who stood to gain with this Eli Lake story? I’d say Hillary because there in nothing really damaging to her in this. The story seems aimed right at Obama, as if to say he had to know and he lied to the American people, through Susan Rice.

At the same time, Obama really can’t fire Hillary at this point because the resulting explosive effect would still severely damage his reelection efforts — maybe fatally.

Rock, meet hard place!

Trochilus on September 26, 2012 at 3:42 PM

ALL embassy security in Libya, up to and including September 11th of this year, was being supplied by Blue Mountain Group,

I like that group. They make very touching greeting cards. /

kekelaward on September 26, 2012 at 4:19 PM

Trochilus on September 26, 2012 at 2:03 PM

So, the story of the squad of eight Marines arriving by helicopter from Tripoli was just a hoax? Another Reuters reporter filed a similar story that is still up on the Reuters site..?

d1carter on September 26, 2012 at 2:37 PM

I honestly could not tell you what the basis was for the story you mentioned, but the Marines were sent in to Libya ONLY AFTER the attack on September 11th, and they came from a ship off shore. A Marine FAST detachment was sent into Tripoli to secure the Embassy there after the attack, having flown in from a ship in the Mediterranean — probably off Gibraltar.

A Marine spokesperson — Captain Kendra N. Motz — specifically confirmed the fact to other writers that there were no Marines stationed anywhere in Libya when the attack took place back on September 11th.

Not in Benghazi, and not at the Embassy in Tripoli either.

The State Department’s “explanation story” for no Marines anywhere in country was that State was negotiating for a Marine detachment to go into Libya “within the next five years.”

Also, as you can see, Captain Motz explained (at the first link, above) in her written statement the difference between an Embassy “MCESG detachment” and a “FAST detachment” which was what went in after the attack. It is a good read.

Hillary Clinton is very vulnerable on this point — I think she’d be toast if it became general public knowledge that there were no Marines anywhere in a place like Libya that was obviously such a hotbed of extremism, and that she had negotiated for a British Security firm — Blue Mountain Group — to pull all the security at our diplomatic outposts in Libya, who were under severely limited “rules of engagement!” That was probably why the State Department simply lied about the British security firm the first time they were asked.

That may also readily explain why Hillary went “silent” for several days, and why her spokesperson ultimately exploded in vulgarity — in writing — at a reporter just yesterday when the reporter kept pressing on the Stevens “diary” story.

They know this is “bad ju-ju” for Hillary!.

Trochilus on September 26, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Trochilus on September 26, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Were there no injured/wounded evacuated..?

d1carter on September 26, 2012 at 2:44 PM

From the attack on the Benghazi Consulate and/or the safe house? There were only a few people there at the time. There may have been one two other diplomatic corps persons who escaped and were somehow able to get to safety. The Ambassador’s body was dragged out by a crowd after the shooting stopped, and was ultimately take to a hospital where he was pronounced dead. Other individuals killed at the main facility, or the “safe house,” included a Foreign Service information officer named Sean Smith, and two private security personnel, former active duty SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, who were also killed and their bodies found at the scene. The latest version of events is that seven Libyans were also injured in the attack, but there seem to be few public details about that which I can find. Initial reports indicated that 10 Libyans were killed, but that account was false.

Trochilus on September 26, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Does anyone care whose bloody fingerprints were left on the column at the Benghazi Consulate?

http://grandrants.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/libya-bloody-fingerprints1.jpg?w=198&h=238

Where is the outrage?

BigAlSouth on September 26, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Boy, just wait until The MSM finds out about this , are gonna be mad or what………this just into our NBC studios mitt Romney said today he is in favor of killing your puppy. Meanwhile at the White House president Obama told us exclusively he loves puppies. The contrast is unprecedented……..

jaywemm on September 26, 2012 at 8:37 PM

. . .
I like that group. They make very touching greeting cards. /

kekelaward on September 26, 2012 at 4:19 PM

Heh! That was funny. Gee, I think I like the winery, too!

But of course, this was the “group” I was referencing.

More here, which would explain why the State Department was forced to admit that they lied the first time they were asked about “Blue Mountain Group.”

Can you imagine . . . “No Bullets” for Embassy or Consular security in an essential tribal country, one that has not even come close to finishing an “overthrow revolution” and where secretive and very violent groups had maintained a “cell” presence in that specific port city under the thumb of the prior brutal dictator . . . probably for decades!

Trochilus on September 26, 2012 at 11:30 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3