Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Libya crisis: Benghazi

[vector7]

On 9/11, Obama addressed Arab Forum praising Arab Spring and “his Heighness” (video)

Posted on September 16, 2012 by creeping

On September 11, 2012, as U.S. embassies were being attacked in Cairo and Benghazi, Barack Hussein Obama addressed the Arab Forum. The video is currently on the Whitehouse’s Youtube page. Obama began by verbally bowing to the government of Qatar and an Islamic sheik referring to him as “his Highness” in an Arabic accent. h/t to tweeter @NavyNmySoul



While Obama was praising the Arab Spring and promising billions of dollars to Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, the Arab Spring was burning American flags, chanting death to America, and raping and killing an American ambassador and three other Americans in those same exact countries.



Two days later, as Muslims continued rioting, burning and killing, the State Department and Hillary Clinton wasted taxpayer dollars to throw a Muslim party to celebrate the end of Ramadan (known to Muslims as the Month of Jihad).

Two days after 9/11 embassy attacks, Hillary Clinton hosted Muslim holiday celebration in D

[Ryan Ruck]

Attackers in Afghanistan Wore US Uniforms – Destroyed Six Harriers

I've been pretty busy the last several days and am just now getting around to looking into this.

This is a MUCH, MUCH bigger deal than has been let on to and, no surprise, I have seen virtually no mainstream or even alternative media coverage of this.

In this attack, the squadron commander, Lt. Col. Christopher Raible was one of the 2 killed. Additionally, the attack destroyed 6 Harriers, almost an entire squadron of the aircraft! That is a big deal for 2 reasons:

1) There are no more of these aircraft being built and the F-35 isn't ready to be fielded yet. In fact, as a stopgap until the Marine Corps version of the F-35 is ready to be fielded, the Marines had to buy retired Harriers from the British since the Harriers they've got have seen so much wear and tear since TWOT started.

2) There are 7 operational and 1 training squadrons of Harriers and we just lost almost an entire squadron of them. This is one of the largest loses of US military aircraft in 11 years of combat in Afghanistan and could well be one of the largest single day losses of aircraft since Vietnam.

Meanwhile I literally just heard on the radio the Marine Corps is busy punishing Marines for pissing on corpses. No big deal we just lost a squadron of aircraft to enemy action, let's focus on trying to appease a group of people that have been perpetually pissed off for the last 14 centuries.

If there were a Republican in the Oval Office, I can guarantee that we'd be hearing about how this was a modern day Tet Offensive meanwhile with a Dem in there, silence. Simply unreal where priorities of the nation, media, political "leadership", and military are.

[American Patriot]

I guess I'll be pissing on corpses soon enough. If those mother fuckers think they can get away with attack us here in America again without a hell of a lot of backlash they have another think coming.

I knew this was a big thing Ryan. I know we're pretty pissed in the military channels but I can't say more than that.

All I can do is surmised that Mr. Fucking Apology Tour will apologize for the terrorists breaking a nail while attack our planes.

A good friend of the family JUST left from that place a few days prior to the attacks. He was unhappy to say the least. He said it shouldn't have happened at all.

[vector7]

US lost eight jets in worst air loss in one day since Vietnam war

email story to a friend
Published: 17 September, 2012, 20:36


Harrier jet (AFP Photo / Leila Gorchev)

TAGS: Arms, Conflict, Military, NATO, Terrorism, USA, War, Planes

After Taliban gunmen destroyed eight Harrier jets at a US camp in Helmand Province, the US military has suffered its worst air loss in one day since the Vietnam War.

The Taliban attacked Camp Bastion, the main strategic base in southwestern Afghanistan, on Sept. 14, causing $200 million in damage in the single most destructive strike on a Western base during the war, according to military officials.

Two Marines were killed, nine coalition personnel were wounded and six jets costing between $23 million and $30 million were completely destroyed.

The approximately 15 insurgents, dressed in US Army uniforms, had penetrated the base Friday night and instantly began shooting and setting fire to parked Navy-AV-8B Harrier jets when they were inside. Three refueling stations were severely damaged during the attack.

“It was a running gun battle for a while, two and a half hours, nonetheless they were able to get to the aircraft before we could intercept them,” a military official told the New York Times. Using machine guns, rocket propelled grenades and possibly mortars, most of the aircrafts were demolished.

After a drawn-out nighttime battle that made it hard to see the enemy, all but one of the Taliban fighters were killed. The remaining insurgent is now in military custody.

Camp Bastion is one of the largest and best-defended posts in Afghanistan, making it troubling that the attackers were able to inflict so much damage.
“We’re saying it’s a very sophisticated attack,” a military official told the Times. “We’ve lost aircraft in battle, but nothing like this.”

The Taliban made a statement blaming the attack on the anti-Muslim video that sparked outrage in the Arab world. But Wahid Mujda, an Afghan analyst who tracks the Taliban, told the Times that an attack as sophisticated as this one took a lot of planning and training, thereby being unrelated to the release of the video.

“I do not think that the Camp Bastion attack had anything to do with the anti-Prophet movie,” he said. “Given the sophistication of the attack one can say with a lot of confidence that the Taliban had been training, rehearsing and preparing for weeks and even months. Everything was not planned and decided overnight.”

The detrimental attack comes after nearly 10,000 American Marines have left Helmand Province over the past several months, now that the offensive is over. But more coalition service members have died this year in Afghanistan. After Friday’s attack, four more service members were killed on Sunday in Zabul Province, bringing the total number of deaths this year to 51. Last year, 35 were killed as a result of this type of violence.

And as US involvement in Afghanistan trickles down, the Taliban has left its mark on the highest security base with the most destructive attack in the region in 11 years.

Marine Attack Squadron loses eight Harrier jets in worst U.S. air loss in one day since the Vietnam War

September 16, 2012

Posted by David Cenciotti in Military Aviation.
Tags: Afghanistan, AV-8B Harrier, Camp Bastion, Camp Bastion attack, Helmand Province, Jump Jet, U.S. Marine Corps, VMA-211
trackback

On Friday Sept. 14, at around 10.15 p.m. local time, a force of Taliban gunmen attacked Camp Bastion, in Helmand Province, the main strategic base in southwestern Afghanistan.

About 15 insurgents (19 according to some reports), wearing U.S. Army uniforms, organized into three teams, breached the perimeter fence and launched an assault on the airfield, that includes the U.S. Camp Leatherneck and the UK’s Camp Bastion, where British royal Prince Harry, an AH-64 Apache pilot (initially believed to be the main target of the attack) is stationed.

The attackers fired machine guns, rocket propelled grenades and possibly mortars against aircraft parked next to the airport’s runway. Two U.S. Marines were killed in the subsequent fighting whereas eight of 10 AV-8B+ Harrier jets of the Yuma-based Marine Attack Squadron (VMA) 211 were destroyed (6) or heavily damaged (2): the worst U.S. air loss in one day since the Vietnam War.

The VMA-211 “Avengers” is part of the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing headquartered in San Diego at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar. It deployed to Afghanistan in April and relocated from Kandahar Airfield to Camp Bastion on Jul. 1.



According to Wikipedia, the VMA-211 last suffered this level of losses on Dec. 8, 1941.

Considered that the U.S. Marine Corps are believed to be equipped with slightly more than 120 AV-8B+, the attack on Camp Bastion has wiped out 1/15th of the entire U.S. Jump Jet fleet and a large slice of the Yuma-based squadron. A serious problem for the USMC, that was compelled to buy second hand RAF Harrier GR9s to keep the AV-8B+ in service beyond 2030, when it will be replaced by the F-35B.

Furthermore, the VMA-211 was the only Marine Harrier unit in Afghanistan: until the destroyed airframes will be replaced (most probably, by another Squadron), the coalition ground forces can’t count on the CAS (Close Air Support) provided by the Harrier.

Tom Meyer has contributed to this post.



Image credit: U.S. Marine Corps

Related Articles

• U.S. amphibious assault ship to be moved into position to support Noncombatant Evacuation Operation in Libya? (theaviationist.com)

[Ryan Ruck]

Just as I though... Most aircraft lost in a single day since Vietnam. Wow...

[AGEUSAF]

Incredible and hardly a word of how this happened. From the first story I heard it sounded like the enemy simply blended in with the others got onto base and did this. This seems like they sneaked in past the wire or forced their way in and then went to work. How in the hell did they get that close to the flight line is beyond me this day in age.

Then again security is an illusion and it just takes balls to pull off most the more seemingly impossible things.

[Ryan Ruck]

Meanwhile I literally just heard on the radio the Marine Corps is busy punishing Marines for pissing on corpses. No big deal we just lost a squadron of aircraft to enemy action, let's focus on trying to appease a group of people that have been perpetually pissed off for the last 14 centuries.

Funny how times change.

[vector7]

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) condemns Barack Hussein Obama for conspiring to create a new Ottoman Empire



Apparently, Obama has his next job all lined up for when he leaves Washington in January, 2013: Caliph (leader) of the new Islamic Caliphate.

Speaking on the House floor, Rep. Gohmert accused the Obama administration of allowing Iran to influence Iraq by pulling U.S. troops out, and suggested the attacks on U.S. diplomatic missions are the result of waning American influence from that decision, the Hill reported. He accuses Obama of jump-starting a new Ottoman Empire and left our friend and ally Israel so vulnerable in this sea of radicalism that he has helped bring to the surface.”

Gohmert said a recent report showed approval for the U.S. among Muslim countries had slipped from 33% under George W. Bush in 2008 to just 15% under Obama now. A Pew Research Center survey noted that median approval in Muslim nations for Obama’s policies has declined over the last three years from 34% to 15%. ”This president is trying to buy affection from people who are bullies, who are radical Islamists, who want to destroy us. You don’t get love and affection, you get contempt,” Gohmert said.

[Ryan Ruck]

Louie Gohmert is one of the good guys. He's been doing great work on Fast and Furious and trying to put Holder and Obama's feet to the fire.

[vector7]

Obama Refuses To Describe Embassy Attack As Terrorism…



He really is a pathetic excuse for a leader.

Via Politico:

The attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed the American ambassador to the country earlier this month “wasn’t just a mob action,” President Barack Obama said Monday.

During an appearance on the daytime TV show “The View,” Obama was asked if the attack was an act of terrorism. Administration officials began labeling it that way last week, but Obama didn’t use precisely that language.

“There’s no doubt that the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn’t just a mob action. What’s clear is that, around the world, there are still a lot of threats out there,” Obama said, according to a pool report.

Initially, the Obama administration claimed the attack grew out of a protest underway at the consulate in response to an anti-Muslim video posted on the Internet. However, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers said Sunday he had “no information” that a protest was underway at that consulate at the time of the attack.

ZIP | September 24, 2012 8:53 pm

[vector7]

Obama: "Let us remember that Muslims have suffered the most at the hands of extremism"

10:43 AM, Sep 25, 2012 • By DANIEL HALPER



In a speech at the United Nations this morning, President Obama says the attacks on America across the Muslim world over the last two weeks are also an "assault on the very ideals upon which the United Nations was founded."

"The attacks on our civilians in Benghazi were attacks on America," Obama stated, according to a prepared transcript of his remarks. "We are grateful for the assistance we received from the Libyan government and the Libyan people. And there should be no doubt that we will be relentless in tracking down the killers and bringing them to justice. I also appreciate that in recent days, the leaders of other countries in the region – including Egypt, Tunisia, and Yemen – have taken steps to secure our diplomatic facilities, and called for calm. So have religious authorities around the globe."

Then, President Obama broadened his argument, saying the United Nations was also under attack.

"But the attacks of the last two weeks are not simply an assault on America," said Obama. "They are also an assault on the very ideals upon which the United Nations was founded – the notion that people can resolve their differences peacefully; that diplomacy can take the place of war; and that in an interdependent world, all of us have a stake in working towards greater opportunity and security for our citizens."

Obama also made a broader case against extremism, saying, "Let us remember that Muslims have suffered the most at the hands of extremism."

Related Stories

• Obama Adviser: 'If He Met With One Leader, He Would ...
• CNN: 'Error in Judgement' for Obama to Skip Meetings ...
• Obama Blocks International Treaty for Blind
• Iran Elected to Top U.N. Arms Trade Treaty Post
• The U.N. Excuse

More by Daniel Halper

• President Obama's U.N. Address
• Obama Adviser: 'If He Met With One Leader, He Would ...
• CNN: 'Error in Judgement' for Obama to Skip Meetings ...
• Israel Walks Out, While U.S. Stays to Listen to Iran's ...
• Hillary Clinton Pushes for Global Tax on Elites

A politics based only on anger –one based on dividing the world between us and them – not only sets back international cooperation, it ultimately undermines those who tolerate it. All of us have an interest in standing up to these forces. Let us remember that Muslims have suffered the most at the hands of extremism. On the same day our civilians were killed in Benghazi, a Turkish police officer was murdered in Istanbul only days before his wedding; more than ten Yemenis were killed in a car bomb in Sana’a; and several Afghan children were mourned by their parents just days after they were killed by a suicide bomber in Kabul.And president Obama made the case that the world come together. "Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies, and that is the vision we will support," said Obama.

[American Patriot]

Which extremists were those who caused all that Muslim suffering again?

I'm sorry, I just don't remember those groups....

[American Patriot]

Libya president: Anti-Islam film trailer had nothing to do with attack on US Consulate

Published September 26, 2012
FoxNews.com




The anti-Islam film trailer that the White House has repeatedly blamed for sparking unrest in the Middle East had nothing to do with the attack that led to the death of U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, that nation's president said in a television interview.


Libyan President Mohamed Magarief said the deadly Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, which also resulted in the deaths of three other Americans, was more likely pegged to the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.


"Reaction should have been, if it was genuine, should have been six months earlier. So it was postponed until the 11th of September," Magarief told NBC’s Ann Curry in the exclusive interview. "They chose this date, 11th of September to carry a certain message."

The trailer for the anti-Islam film "had nothing to do with this attack."

- Libyan President Mohamed Magarief



President Obama and White House staffers have sent mixed signals about what triggered the siege on the unprotected U.S. consulate in the troubled Libyan city, with Obama continuing to blame the film trailer even as evidence mounts to the contrary.


Magarief noted that there were no protesters at the consulate prior to the attack, and that the incident was more of a clearly coordinated assault than a demonstration run amok. He noted the attackers used rocket-propelled grenades on the consulate and then fired mortars at a safe house where Stevens had fled.


In addition to Stevens, information management officer Sean Smith and former Navy SEALs and security personnel Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed.


"It's a pre-planned act of terrorism," Magarief said, concluding that the trailer for a purported film called “Innocence of Muslims” had "nothing to do with this attack." The trailer had been on the Internet since July, but no full-length film has emerged.


Magarief conceded that Libyans took part in the attack, but said "these Libyans do not represent the Libyan people or Libyan population in any sense of the word."


Magarief, who called Stevens a “humble and very unique individual,” said the nation is in debt to the U.S. for helping to oust ruthless dictator Muammar Qaddafi.


"We consider the United States as a friend, not only a friend, a strong friend, who stood with us in our moment of need," he said.




Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/09...#ixzz27aAscUQ4

[American Patriot]

Not sure how this got closed... wasn't SUPPOSED to be... but it suddenly was. I must have clicked someplace wrong on the screen this morning.

Ok. it's back opened.

[American Patriot]

Bret Bair is reporting on the news this morning that the attack that killed the Ambassador was "labeled a terrorist attack" with 24 hours of the attack BY THE WHITE HOUSE. But they continued to DENY it for several days afterward.

Proof is proof.

[American Patriot]

September 26th, 2012
09:32 PM ET


Sources: 15 days after Benghazi attack, FBI still not on the scene

More than two weeks after four Americans - including the U.S. ambassador to Libya - were killed in an attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, FBI agents have not yet been granted access to investigate in the eastern Libyan city, and the crime scene has not been secured, sources said.
"They've gotten as far as Tripoli now, but they've never gotten to Benghazi," CNN National Security Analyst Fran Townsend said Wednesday, citing senior law enforcement officials.
Last Thursday, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters that an FBI team had reached Libya earlier in the week.
"In fairness to the secretary, it may be that she wanted to be coy about where they were in Libya for security concerns. That's understandable. But the fact is, it's not clear they've been in Libya for very long," Townsend said on CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360°."
"They had difficulty, and we understand there was some bureaucratic infighting between the FBI and Justice Department on the one hand, and the State Department on the other, and so it took them longer than they would have liked to get into country. They've now gotten there. But they still are unable to get permission to go to Benghazi."
FBI agents have made a request through the U.S. State Department for the crime scene to be secured, Townsend said, but that has not happened.
"The senior law enforcement official I spoke to said, 'If we get there now, it's not clear that it will be of any use to us,'" Townsend said.
The FBI team has conducted interviews of State Department and U.S. government personnel who were in Libya at the time of the attack, Townsend said, but the FBI's request to directly question individuals who Libyan authorities have in custody was denied.
U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens was one of four Americans slain in the September 11 assault, when the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi came under attack amid a large protest about a U.S.-made film that mocked the Muslim Prophet Mohammed.
Speaking to reporters last Thursday, White House spokesman Jay Carney said the assault was a "terrorist attack."

[American Patriot]

Al Qaeda in Libya—a Growing Threat

August report from a Pentagon counterterrorism project and Library of Congress warned about terrorists in Libya.

12:00 AM, Sep 20, 2012 • By THOMAS JOSCELYN


Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts



FOX News reported Wednesday night that a former Guantanamo detainee named Sufyan ben Qumu has been tied to the September 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans. While the details of Qumu’s alleged involvement remain to be confirmed, it isn’t surprising that his name has surfaced in intelligence circles.

THE WEEKLY STANDARD has obtained an unclassified report published in August that fingers Qumu as a key al Qaeda operative in Libya. The report (“Al Qaeda in Libya: A Profile”) was prepared by the research division of the Library of Congress (LOC) under an agreement with the Defense Department’s Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office.
The report details al Qaeda’s plans for Libya, including the growth of a clandestine terrorist network that has attempted to hide its presence. The U.S military has concluded that al Qaeda is in the final phase of a three-step process for developing a full-blown al Qaeda affiliate.
The contents of the report are sure to raise additional questions about the Obama administration's claim that al Qaeda is near defeat, and what administration officials knew about the growing threat from al Qaeda in Libya prior to the attack on the consulate.
One of the al Qaeda-affiliated parties inside Libya is called Ansar al Sharia – a brand used by al Qaeda chapters elsewhere, including inside Yemen. According to the report, Qumu leads an Ansar al Sharia brigade, which “has increasingly embodied al Qaeda’s presence in Libya, as indicated by its active social-media propaganda, extremist discourse, and hatred of the West, especially the United States.”

[American Patriot]

6:14 pm ET September 19, 2012

FOX NEWS EXCLUSIVE: Intel Sources Say Libya Attack Tied to Al Qaeda and Ex-Gitmo Detainee Sufyan Ben Qumu

by Fox News Insider

On tonight’s Special Report, Bret Baier reported on an exclusive breaking news alert: intelligence sources are convinced the Mideast attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya was directly tied to Al Qaeda.


Catherine Herridge reported that they believe that Sufyan Ben Qumu (whose name has also been transliterated as Sofiane Ibrahim Gammu) was likely involved in the attack, and even may have led the attack on the consulate.


Qumu – a Libyan – was released from the US prison at Guantanamo Bay in 2007 and transferred to Libyan custody under the condition that he would be kept in jail. He wasn’t.


According to his Gitmo files, he was also tied to 9/11 financiers, and his alias is “found on a list of probable Al Qaeda personnel receiving monthly stipends and family support.”

CLICK HERE FOR THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT: Gitmo Transfer Papers for Al Qaeda Employee Who May Have Led Libya Attack

[American Patriot]

Obama lied about what happened in Benghazi. Not just once, but over nine days until the truth exposed him.

"So we are left with this: Four Americans were killed in a premeditated terrorist attack on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11, and for more than a week the Obama administration misled the country about what happened."

September 23, 2012
Now we know the truth. Obama lied for nine days about the Benghazi terrorist attacks that killed an American ambassador and three other Americans. The lies were not just isolated pieces of information but rather the entire message about what happened was a blatant lie.

Stephen F. Hayes, writing in The Weekly Standard breaks it down for us:

For nine days, the Obama administration made a case that virtually everyone understood was untrue: that the killing of our ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi, Libya, was a random, spontaneous act of individuals upset about an online video—an unpredictable attack on a well-protected compound that had nothing do to with the eleventh anniversary of 9/11.

These claims were wrong. Every one of them. But the White House pushed them hard.

Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, appeared on five Sunday talk shows on September 16. A "hateful video" triggered a "spontaneous protest .  .  . outside of our consulate in Benghazi" that "spun from there into something much, much more violent," she said on Face the Nation. "We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned."

On This Week, Rice said the consulate was well secured. "The security personnel that the State Department thought were required were in place," she said, adding: "We had substantial presence with our personnel and the consulate in Benghazi. Tragically two of the four Americans who were killed were there providing security. That was their function, and indeed there were many other colleagues who were doing the same with them."

White House press secretary Jay Carney not only denied that the attacks had anything to do with the anniversary of 9/11 but scolded reporters who, citing the administration's own pre-9/11 boasts about its security preparations for the anniversary, made the connection. "I think that you're conveniently conflating two things," Carney snapped, "which is the anniversary of 9/11 and the incidents that took place, which are under investigation."

Wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong. Intelligence officials understood immediately that the attacks took place on 9/11 for a reason. The ambassador, in a country that faces a growing al Qaeda threat, had virtually no security. The two contractors killed in the attacks were not part of the ambassador's security detail, and there were not, in fact, "many other colleagues" working security with them.

The nature of the attack itself, a four-hour battle that took place in two waves, indicated some level of planning. "The idea that this criminal and cowardly act was a spontaneous protest that just spun out of control is completely unfounded and preposterous," Libyan president Mohammad el-Megarif told National Public Radio. When a reporter asked Senator Carl Levin, one of the most partisan Democrats in the upper chamber, if the attack was planned, Levin said it was. "I think there's evidence of that. There's been evidence of that," he responded, adding: "The attack looked like it was planned and premeditated, sure." Levin made his comments after a briefing from Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.

Representative Adam Smith, a Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, agreed. "This was not just a mob that got out of hand. Mobs don't come in and attack, guns blazing. I think that there is a growing consensus it was preplanned." And according to CNN, Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy "has said that the attack appeared to be planned because it was so extensive and because of the 'proliferation' of small and medium weapons at the scene." Not only was the attack planned, it appears there was no protest at all. Citing eyewitnesses, CBS News reported late last week: "There was never an anti-American protest outside the consulate."

So we are left with this: Four Americans were killed in a premeditated terrorist attack on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11, and for more than a week the Obama administration misled the country about what happened.

This isn't just a problem. It's a scandal.

If this were the first time top Obama officials had tried to sell a bogus narrative after an attack, perhaps they would deserve the benefit of the doubt. It's not.

Click here to read the rest of the story.

Click here to read another perspective, and this from the Elite Media. (CBS-DC News)

Click here to read a British press version.

[American Patriot]

Permanent Spin

Oct 1, 2012, Vol. 18, No. 03 • By STEPHEN F. HAYES


Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts



For nine days, the Obama administration made a case that virtually everyone understood was untrue: that the killing of our ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi, Libya, was a random, spontaneous act of individuals upset about an online video—an unpredictable attack on a well-protected compound that had nothing do to with the eleventh anniversary of 9/11.
U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice
NEWSCOM

These claims were wrong. Every one of them. But the White House pushed them hard.
Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, appeared on five Sunday talk shows on September 16. A “hateful video” triggered a “spontaneous protest .  .  . outside of our consulate in Benghazi” that “spun from there into something much, much more violent,” she said on Face the Nation. “We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.”
On This Week, Rice said the consulate was well secured. “The security personnel that the State Department thought were required were in place,” she said, adding: “We had substantial presence with our personnel and the consulate in Benghazi. Tragically two of the four Americans who were killed were there providing security. That was their function, and indeed there were many other colleagues who were doing the same with them.”
White House press secretary Jay Carney not only denied that the attacks had anything to do with the anniversary of 9/11 but scolded reporters who, citing the administration’s own pre-9/11 boasts about its security preparations for the anniversary, made the connection. “I think that you’re conveniently conflating two things,” Carney snapped, “which is the anniversary of 9/11 and the incidents that took place, which are under investigation.”






Wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong. Intelligence officials understood immediately that the attacks took place on 9/11 for a reason. The ambassador, in a country that faces a growing al Qaeda threat, had virtually no security. The two contractors killed in the attacks were not part of the ambassador’s security detail, and there were not, in fact, “many other colleagues” working security with them.
The nature of the attack itself, a four-hour battle that took place in two waves, indicated some level of planning. “The idea that this criminal and cowardly act was a spontaneous protest that just spun out of control is completely unfounded and preposterous,” Libyan president Mohammad el-Megarif told National Public Radio. When a reporter asked Senator Carl Levin, one of the most partisan Democrats in the upper chamber, if the attack was planned, Levin said it was. “I think there’s evidence of that. There’s been evidence of that,” he responded, adding: “The attack looked like it was planned and premeditated, sure.” Levin made his comments after a briefing from Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.
Representative Adam Smith, a Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, agreed. “This was not just a mob that got out of hand. Mobs don’t come in and attack, guns blazing. I think that there is a growing consensus it was preplanned.” And according to CNN, Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy “has said that the attack appeared to be planned because it was so extensive and because of the ‘proliferation’ of small and medium weapons at the scene.” Not only was the attack planned, it appears there was no protest at all. Citing eyewitnesses, CBS News reported late last week: “There was never an anti-American protest outside the consulate.”
So we are left with this: Four Americans were killed in a premeditated terrorist attack on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11, and for more than a week the Obama administration misled the country about what happened.
This isn’t just a problem. It’s a scandal.
If this were the first time top Obama officials had tried to sell a bogus narrative after an attack, perhaps they would deserve the benefit of the doubt. It’s not.
On December 28, 2009, three days after Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab attempted to detonate explosives in his underwear aboard an airliner over Detroit, President Obama told the country that the incident was the work of “an isolated extremist.” It wasn’t. Abdulmutallab was trained, directed, and financed by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, a fact he shared with investigators early in his interrogation.

The same thing happened less than six months later, after Faisal Shahzad attempted to blow up his Nissan Pathfinder in Times Square. Two days following the botched attack, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano took to the Sunday shows to dismiss reports of a conspiracy and insisted that the attempted bombing was just a “one-off” by a single attacker. It wasn’t. A week later, after much of the information had leaked, Attorney General Eric Holder acknowledged that the United States had “evidence that shows that the Pakistani Taliban was behind the attack. We know that they helped facilitate it, we know that they probably helped finance it and that he was working at their direction.”
In each instance, top administration officials quickly downplayed or dismissed the seriousness of the events, only to acknowledge, after the shock had worn off and the media had turned to other news, that their initial stories were incorrect. Whether it was because the attempted attacks were unsuccessful or because the media simply lost interest, the administration largely escaped serious criticism for making claims that turned out to be wrong.






They’ve had mixed success this time. On the one hand, as the final elements of the administration’s story began to unravel in the middle of last week, the New York Times did not find those facts fit to print. On Thursday morning, the same day White House spokesman Jay Carney would finally admit that the Benghazi assault was “a terrorist attack,” the Times did not publish a story about Libya. It wasn’t as though it took serious digging to find the contradictions. One day earlier, Fox News had reported that intelligence officials were investigating the possibility that a former Guantánamo detainee had been involved in the attack. A story by Reuters raised questions about administration descriptions of the protests, noting “new information” that “suggests that the protests at the outset were so small and unthreatening as to attract little notice.” The story reported: “While many questions remain, the latest accounts differ from the initial information provided by the Obama administration, which had suggested that protests in front of the consulate over an anti-Islamic film had played a major role in precipitating the subsequent violent attack.” And CBS, as noted, reported that same day that there simply were no protests.
And what about the film? The Obama administration has sought to explain nearly everything that has happened over the past two weeks as a response to the video. President Obama denounced it during his remarks at the memorial for the four Americans killed in Libya. So did Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. White House spokesman Jay Carney has mentioned it almost daily. At the end of last week, the United States spent $70,000 to buy ads in Pakistan to distance the U.S. government from its message.
That’s ironic. In its effort to deflect blame for the unrest, the administration has given more attention to this obscure film than it ever would have gotten if they’d simply ignored it. It’s true that radical Islamists used the film to help populate the 9/11 protests at the U.S. embassy in Cairo. But they also told fellow radicals to join in a protest of the continued detention of Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind sheikh who was behind the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. And some of the others who gathered were “Ultras”—soccer hooligans looking for trouble.
The American embassy in Cairo first drew attention to the film in its statement. And the administration—after initially distancing itself from that statement—has made it the centerpiece of its public relations campaign ever since, as protests spread to more than 20 countries. The result: Every Muslim with access to media is now aware of a bizarre video that had a few thousand views on YouTube on September 10.
That’s exactly what the radicals wanted, according to a U.S. intelligence official familiar with the reporting on Egypt. The focus on the film was an “information operation” by jihadists designed to generate rage against America. If he’s right, it worked.
Barack Obama came to office promising to repair relations with the Islamic world. What he couldn’t accomplish by the mere fact of his presidency, through his name and his familiarity with Islam, he would achieve through “smart diplomacy.”
Instead, over the last four years, and particularly the last two weeks, the defining characteristics of his foreign policy have been mendacity, incompetence, and, yes, stupidity.