Did the NY Times contradict itself on their Benghazi piece?

posted at 6:31 pm on December 29, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

Ed already covered some of the serious problems with this weekend’s New York Times “deep analysis” of Benghazi, showing how much of their focus was on the crumbs rather than the meat of the situation. Erika went one further, discussing how members of Congress in the know have already been informed that the entire sordid affair was no accident. But just for a bit more comprehensive coverage, long time friend of Hot Air Kerry Picket has a piece at Breitbart noting how it now seems that the Paper of Record actually contradicted itself in attempting to provide cover for Hillary Clinton in 2016.

A September 2012 P.J. Media piece by Patrick Poole shows how bizarre the recent New York Times piece’s attempt to downplay Libya’s Ansar al-shariah’s connection to Al Qaeda. At the time, Fox News reported that Abu Sufyan Bin Qumu, a former GITMO detainee and head of Ansar al-Shariah, was on the ground in Benghazi the week of the attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans:

A former Guantanamo Bay detainee with Al Qaeda ties was in Benghazi the night of the Sept. 11 attack, according to a source on the ground in Libya.

The source told Fox News that ex-detainee Sufian bin Qumu, who is suspected of running camps in eastern Libya where some of the assailants trained, is also a “respected member” of Ansar al-Sharia — one of the Islamist groups identified in State Department email traffic two hours after the attack.

Two sources familiar with the investigation, when asked about bin Qumu’s whereabouts the night of the attack, did not dispute the claim he was in Benghazi.

While it is not clear whether bin Qumu was directing the assault, his security file from Guantanamo may be revealing. Having already trained in Usama bin Laden’s camps, in 1998 bin Qumu joined the Taliban in Pakistan and “communicated with likely extremist elements via radio during this period indicating a position of leadership,” the file shows.

That wasn’t the only piece of contradictory reporting uncovered in the first 24 hours since the article hit the Times website. There was no mention of Egyptian power broker Muhammad Jamal al Kashef, though as recently as October, multiple Times reporters had said that his network – closely affiliated with al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb – was involved in the attack. Attempting to swing attention from these previously reportable affiliations back to a Youtube video seems to either require a very short attention span or to allow the possibility that somebody is trying to rewrite history here. Kerry concludes with the following:

Jocelyn also points to key suspect Faraj al-Shibli, a Libyan who according to U.S. intelligence officials contacted by The Weekly Standard served as Osama bin Laden’s bodyguard during the 1990s. Kirkpatrick stands by his story; he claimed on NBC’s Meet The Press that the Benghazi attackers were only local attackers, but in order to truly believe that one would have to think other players and events reported on by the New York Times itself never existed or happened.

This New York Times report is wandering ever closer to Alice in Wonderland territory. Curiouser and curiouser.


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

One lie is as good as another for The Party’s propaganda organ.

Murphy9 on December 29, 2013 at 6:34 PM

Is the Pope Catholic?

sandee on December 29, 2013 at 6:35 PM

Did the NY Times contradict itself on their Benghazi piece?

That is no longer news…

That is just the way it is.

right2bright on December 29, 2013 at 6:39 PM

This New York Times report is wandering ever closer to Walter Duranty territory. Curiouser and curiouser.

FIFY

Del Dolemonte on December 29, 2013 at 6:40 PM

The truth is now whatever they say it is. It is not based in reality. It has no connection with the past or the future. It cannot be contradicted even by their own past reporting. And future reports have no duty to adhere to what was reported here.

The truth is whatever they say it is… at this moment.

Have you not figured this out yet?

UnderstandingisPower on December 29, 2013 at 6:41 PM

Magic 8 Ball says all signs point to it

damn it, SparkPlug

Axe on December 29, 2013 at 6:44 PM

Ha ha. The NYT article requires a short attention span in order to prevent massive cognitive dissonance?

Are you kidding me?

The typical New York Times reader — not the one who reads it out of job necessity, but the jackass who reads it to get all the news that’s fit to print — is barely conscious.

The NYT doesn’t write for the short attention span reader as a service of some sort, it writes for the short attention span reader because they know their audience excruciatingly well.

jeff_from_mpls on December 29, 2013 at 6:44 PM

Did they bump their heads more times than a Killary under oath?

viking01 on December 29, 2013 at 6:45 PM

Curiouser and curiouser.

Not at all. Entirely unsurprising. This is what the NY Times does, their raison d’etre.

rrpjr on December 29, 2013 at 6:47 PM

Democrats…the party of old, fat, white woman.

trs on December 29, 2013 at 6:47 PM

This New York Times report is wandering ever closer to Walter Duranty territory. Curiouser and curiouser.

FIFY

Del Dolemonte on December 29, 2013 at 6:40 PM

This

Lost in Jersey on December 29, 2013 at 6:49 PM

attempting to provide cover for Hillary Clinton in 2016

…it’s just the press… stimulating her genital area for her…as usual.

KOOLAID2 on December 29, 2013 at 6:53 PM

If the progressive powers-that-be decree that 2 + 2 = 5, then 2 + 2 = 5. And Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.

MidniteRambler on December 29, 2013 at 6:57 PM

Jazz, we have long since fallen through the rabbit hole. Remember, Dear Liar has told health insurance companies to offer bare bones catastrophic plans, despite him calling such plans “substandard” and Obamacare making them illegal. Oh, and such plans are to be in effect even without payment.

rbj on December 29, 2013 at 7:02 PM

No matter what, if anyone other than the Fat man get the nomination, Hillary should be hammered on Ben Ghazi.

That is her Legacy from State. And if she can’t run on her record she pretty much has nothing else except her husbands name.

And if the Republican candidate does not hammer her, then we will know we have truly been sold out by the Party and it is time to go full Third party.

Johnnyreb on December 29, 2013 at 7:04 PM

This New York Times report is wandering ever closer to Alice in Wonderland territory. Curiouser and curiouser.

Off with their heads!

ghostwalker1 on December 29, 2013 at 7:08 PM

It’s important not to be too rigid with this “truth” idea when pursuing a higher goal.

kcewa on December 29, 2013 at 7:09 PM

MG, He is doing it again.

SparkPlug on December 29, 2013 at 7:09 PM

attempting to provide cover for Hillary Clinton in 2016.

I think this was an attempt by the Times to vindicate or provide cover for Hillary in 2016, but it could end up having the opposite effect. This puts the Benghazi story back in the news and it could lead to more people that were at Benghazi on the night of the attacks to come out and contradict the NYT.

midgeorgian on December 29, 2013 at 7:11 PM

Just a piece to prop up Hillary…truth be damned

cmsinaz on December 29, 2013 at 7:26 PM

didn’t Hillary bump her head and get amnesia?

SparkPlug on December 29, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Just a piece to prop up Hillary…truth be damned

cmsinaz on December 29, 2013 at 7:26 PM

What does it matter at this point? It was just a bump in the road.

whatcat on December 29, 2013 at 7:36 PM

What cat……heh

cmsinaz on December 29, 2013 at 7:39 PM

midgeorgian on December 29, 2013 at 7:11 PM

My thought as well… Pretty risky kicking a sleeping dog. Unless, as others are writing, this is meant to dull the edge of something new leaking out soon.

SteveInRTP on December 29, 2013 at 7:40 PM

President Clinton… Hillary wins!!!

MT on December 29, 2013 at 7:47 PM

didn’t Hillary bump her head and get amnesia?

SparkPlug on December 29, 2013 at 7:32 PM

…if we have to look at that face…and hear her shrill for four years…we are all going to want amnesia!

KOOLAID2 on December 29, 2013 at 7:47 PM

But just for a bit more comprehensive coverage, long time friend of Hot Air Kerry Picket has a piece at Breitbart noting how it now seems that the Paper of Record actually contradicted itself in attempting to provide cover for Hillary Clinton in 2016.

The story doesn’t need journalistic integrity. Nor does it need to be internally consistent. All it needs to do is have the right headline and right “sound bite” and Hillary will use it to rebuild her narrative.

Hillary: “Look, the Youtube video had a lot to do with this, and these discredited right wing nut-jobs who suggested otherwise are just not credible. The NYT did a story on this. Now can we just move on?”

Right-wing media: “butbutbut the NYT story is inconsistent and you never answered X, Y, Z on blah blah blah…”

Media: “Clearly Republicans are trying to relitigate the Benghazi affair for crass political points, but Hillary skillfully parried their attack…”

Outlander on December 29, 2013 at 7:59 PM

The NYT cranks out a puff=pastry piece in order to provide a thin-candy shell of teflon for its candidate of choice and to protect the Hawaiian prince.

onlineanalyst on December 29, 2013 at 8:00 PM

They are simply trying to confuse the situation. It’s the new thing. Look at what the 60 Minutes piece accomplished for Hillary and the Regime.

forest on December 29, 2013 at 8:06 PM

I don’t know anyone who reads the NYT. Well, maybe Krauthammer.

However, media needs a source they can quote. If you need a quote, put it in the NYT, and then you can quote it.

Isn’t that how Hillary ran State? Someone was cranking out her copy.

Except the real filmmaker is still in jail, I would have guessed Craig Livingston made the Mohammed video.

I can’t recall.

Where did we first read about the video? Couldn’t have been the arabic news services, since no one over there had seen the YouTube until Hillary flew over Pakistan with a bullhorn advertising the URL

You can quote me

entagor on December 29, 2013 at 8:08 PM

The NY Times has already entered campaign mode and clearly put out a disinformation piece to sucker the low information voters into not beleiving the obvious truth that the video was not the cause of a “spontaneous attack”. Hillary is their candidate and they will say anything they have to to get her elected.

Remember the article about the supposed McCain love interest that was completely false? Remember the “explosive” story in 2004 about how the army bypassed explosives which supposedly allowed the Iraqi insurgency? Like no army has ever bypassed abandoned enemey ordanance while pursuing their army. Just making things up is no problem for the progressive left. As long as it is in serving their agenda, there is nothing out of bounds.

KW64 on December 29, 2013 at 8:13 PM

Commenter TigersEye lists these refutations to the NYT whitewash:

Pro-al Qaeda group seen behind deadly Benghazi attack CNN, Sept. 13th
Libyans See al Qaeda Hand in Embassy Attack WSJ, Sept. 17th

The Motive and the Means: Did al-Qaeda Stage the Benghazi Attack? Time, Oct. 2nd

Al Qaeda, ex-Gitmo detainee involved in consulate attack, intelligence sources say Fox News, Sept. 20th

Benghazi: A Sea of Al-Qaeda Flags NRO, November 5, 2011

US military official: Some Benghazi consulate attackers had links to al-Qaida in North Africa Nov. 14, 2012
Gen. Ham, commander of Africom.

onlineanalyst on December 29, 2013 at 8:13 PM

The point isn’t for the Times’ story to be accurate.

The point is for the Times to give the Clintons a story to point to and claim it is accurate, so that when the Benghazi questions come in 2015-16, they can simply say the Times exonerated Hillary and it’s old news.

jon1979 on December 29, 2013 at 8:15 PM

When you have two faces you can lie with double the power.

The NY Times- All The News That Fits Our Story.

profitsbeard on December 29, 2013 at 8:38 PM

The New York Times long ago ceased being an objective newspaper. It is now a 100% propaganda organ.

bw222 on December 29, 2013 at 8:42 PM

The New York Times long ago ceased being an objective newspaper. It is now a 100% propaganda organ.

bw222 on December 29, 2013 at 8:42 PM

…it’s an “organ”…alright!

KOOLAID2 on December 29, 2013 at 8:45 PM

It’s news only if the media reports it. Tough to prevail when the referees are for the other side.

MT on December 29, 2013 at 8:47 PM

Democrats…the party of old, fat, white woman.
trs on December 29, 2013 at 6:47 PM

Haha. Love it

congma on December 29, 2013 at 8:47 PM

So, when a Republican is in office the “Paper of Record” reveals intelligence secrets about the banks cooperating with us to track al Qaeda money transactions and it’s to protect the country. When a Democrat’s in office, the “Paper of Record” is willing to lie to protect that President and his secretary of State (who might be running for President in 2 years).

I have to say that people who subscribe to this rag are being duped on a daily basis. Not only does the paper not have America’s interest at heart, it’s proving to be nothing more than a media arm of the Democratic Party. Why does anyone read this rag?

bflat879 on December 29, 2013 at 8:51 PM

OT, news from Russia

Schadenfreude on December 29, 2013 at 9:48 PM

The only truth in the NYT article is that is was NOT AlQaida.

It was an arm of AlQaida.

The guy wants to sell books, save obama’s pajama azz and wash Hillary’s bloody hands.

Schadenfreude on December 29, 2013 at 9:50 PM

This stuff is dangerous. Do these folks think no one is keeping score?

Mason on December 29, 2013 at 10:15 PM

I would hope that no one is foolish enough to read the NYT expecting actual news or truth. They haven’t printed anything but Democrat propaganda for years.

I understand the crossword is still good.

talkingpoints on December 29, 2013 at 10:34 PM

The NYT is just a bunch of Dirt bags.

TX-96 on December 29, 2013 at 11:14 PM

“The ends justify the means”

tngmv on December 29, 2013 at 11:41 PM

If they had brought any of the hundred plus terrorists to trial, then the Times couldn’t do this. Just in the daily course, one of the terrorists would have fell in their laps by now. They are going out of their way to avoid capturing any of the terrorists.

Buddahpundit on December 29, 2013 at 11:42 PM

September 21, 2012

An unclassified report published in August highlights al Qaeda’s strategy for building a fully operational network in Libya. The report (“Al Qaeda in Libya: A Profile”) was prepared by the federal research division of the Library of Congress (LOC) under an agreement with the Defense Department’s Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office.

Al Qaeda’s senior leadership (AQSL) in Pakistan has overseen the effort. AQSL “issued strategic guidance to followers in Libya and elsewhere to take advantage of the Libyan rebellion,” the report reads. AQSL ordered its followers to “gather weapons,” “establish training camps,” “build a network in secret,” “establish an Islamic state,” and “institute sharia” law in Libya.

Each part of this strategy is being implemented, and al Qaeda’s plan has advanced to the final stages.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2012/09/al_qaedas_plan_for_l.php
Al Qaeda’s growing presence in Libya is not self-contained, but instead part of an international network. Al Qaeda operatives in Libya work with their counterparts in al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), a known al Qaeda affiliate, and other parties throughout North Africa and the Middle East.

Al Qaeda’s “clandestine network in Libya will probably continue to provide critical support to AQIM,” the report reads, “especially with regard to arms procurement and safe passage of militants, which are essential to sustain AQIM’s war in northern Mali.”

The report’s authors warn that Libya “may already have become the favorite destination for would-be jihadists in Syria.” Recruits from north Africa and Europe “are increasingly crossing Libya’s borders on their way to Syria, probably with the blessing of the current Libyan government.” Libya has long been tied to the jihadist network in Syria, as many of the al Qaeda fighters who transited through Syria to fight the US-led coalition in Iraq came from eastern Libya.

Although al Qaeda did not bring the Arab Spring, the terrorist group is seeking to capitalize on it. Al Qaeda “has tried to exploit the ‘Arab Awakening’ in North Africa for its own purposes during the past year,” the report reads.

A clandestine network in Libya is just part of AQSL’s plan.

http://www.kronosadvisory.com/CTTSO_Al_Qaeda_in_Libya_Final_Obtained260912.pdf

luckybogey on December 30, 2013 at 12:57 AM

Gotta luv Hillary & Barry….. Power in the world is now passing to the East, to China, to Russia and to other rising nations as the United States is an aging tiger whose teeth are falling out.

way ta go champs

roflmmfao

donabernathy on December 30, 2013 at 2:14 AM

So the NYT goes all Dan Rather on us in their first major cheer of the big 2016 presidential sweepstakes game. Nothing new other than the fact that the official organ of the socialist left has declared their choice for candidate by so doing.

Don L on December 30, 2013 at 8:10 AM

Whatever their motive, the NYT piece is demonstrably false based on many different accounts including those of eyewitnesses.

Even image grabs from security cameras released publicly by the FBI contradict their narrative. They show specific attack elements engaged in a coordinated assault.

That’s not spontaneous, it’s planned and deliberate.

It’s up to fairytale writers like the NYT to prove this was not planned and coordinated by terrorist elements.

Marcus Traianus on December 30, 2013 at 8:12 AM

It’s good to have the facts on one’s side, but hardly decisive. The Donks are going full media blitz on the NYT piece. They’re circling the wagons around Obama and, of course, around Madam “What difference does it make.” Unless the GOP pushes back hard the NYT account will become the “official” version and Benghazi will be dead as a weapon against either one of them.

MJBrutus on December 30, 2013 at 8:16 AM

Is the NY Times really a legitimate news source…. They are just an organ of the democrat party.

Kjeil on December 30, 2013 at 10:03 AM

And the city has a communist mayor.

Let’s wall them up and let them live without oil or the need to work.

RobertMN on December 30, 2013 at 11:45 AM

Why the West is in decline, moronic sheepleton.

Schadenfreude on December 30, 2013 at 11:55 AM

All the propaganda that’s fit to print.

redmama on December 30, 2013 at 7:38 PM

You can tell Hillary as decided to run in 2016 because the major media is starting to re-write history, trying to spin bull-shi’ite, & gloss over Hillary’s part in the betrayal & sacrifice of Americans in Benghazi!

“It’s MY turn.”
- Yes it is, bi-atch, & I hope you get everything coming to you! Just how many American lives are you willing to sacrifice to win the Presidency? Just curious…

easyt65 on December 31, 2013 at 1:22 AM