You have commented 338 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Africa North
Emails told White House of terrorist claim two hours after Libya attack
2012-10-24
Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after the assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, on September 11 that an Islamic terrorist militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

The emails, obtained from government sources not connected with U.S. intelligence agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks. The short emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, while it was still under way, to Washington.

Spokesmen for the White House and State Department had no immediate response to requests for comments on the emails.

The records obtained by Reuters consist of three emails dispatched by the State Department's Operations Center to multiple government offices, including addresses at the White House, Pentagon, intelligence community and FBI, on the afternoon of September 11.

The first, timed at 4:05 p.m. Washington time - or 10:05 p.m. Benghazi time, 20-30 minutes after the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission allegedly began - carried the subject line "U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack" and the notation "SBU", meaning "Sensitive But Unclassified."

The message said the State Department's regional security office had reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was "under attack. Embassy in Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well."

It continued, "Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four ... personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support."

A second email, headed "Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi" and timed 4:54 p.m. Washington time, said that the Embassy in Tripoli had reported that "the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi had stopped and the compound had been cleared." It said a "response team" was at the site attempting to locate missing personnel.

A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: "Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack." The message reported, "Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli."

While some of the content identifying recipients of this message was redacted from copies of the messages, a government source said that one of the addresses to which the message was sent was the White House Situation Room. Other addressees included intelligence and military units as well as one used by the FBI command Center, according to the source.
Posted by:ryuge

#15  What chaffs me badly is the overt false assertion about a video-inspired riot. THAT was clearly false and they damned well knew it, or should have.
Obama and Hill are both lawyers, yet scapegoated a video producer and US citizen--what about his Constitutional rights? King O arrogantly acts with impunity but this may be his Waterloo.
Posted by: Lumpy Elmoluck 5095   2012-10-24 22:59  

#14  Gaffney has a great article on Benghazigate in the Washington Times that would explain why they would try to blame it all on a video: In short, it seems President Obama has been engaged in gun-walking on a massive scale. The effect has been to equip AmericaÂ’s enemies to wage jihad not only against regimes it once claimed were our friends, but inevitably against us and our allies as well. That would explain his administrationÂ’s desperate and now failing bid to mislead the voters through the serial deflections of Benghazigate.
Posted by: Lumpy Elmoluck 5095   2012-10-24 22:49  

#13  It's quite conceivable that they would lie to promote that assertion.
Also quite conceivable they were telling the truth.
Posted by: Glenmore   2012-10-24 18:50  

#12  OK, I'm going to agree with the Administration on one point: the fact that an Islamicist group claimed responsibility is really not necessarily reliable evidence they did it.

Groups jostling for street cred make such claims often. We know that Ansar al Shariah was making a play to lead Islamist groups overall because they organized a meeting in Benghazi earlier this summer and attempted to assert their leadership there. It's quite conceivable that they would lie to promote that assertion.

What chaffs me badly is the overt false assertion about a video-inspired riot. THAT was clearly false and they damned well knew it, or should have.
Posted by: lotp   2012-10-24 18:28  

#11  They also tied it to an international push for censorship.

I seem to remember some other screw-up attempted tie-into a null-and-void of our rights..

2Fast2Furious
Posted by: swksvolFF   2012-10-24 16:40  

#10  It is interesting to note who was copied on these emails and reports.
Posted by: JohnQC   2012-10-24 14:55  

#9  166 pages released by ISSA of unclassified emails, incidents, and security reports from Benghazi consulate
Posted by: JohnQC   2012-10-24 14:30  

#8  Quoting Vodkapundit, Stephen Green:

So why the coverup? Why the lame attempt to blame it on a video, the producer of which is still in jail? Why send Susan Rice out on five Sunday shows in one morning to plead ignorance?

Simple.

ItÂ’s hard to do victory laps around al Qaeda while al Qaeda is running victory laps around the smoldering remains of our consulate.
Posted by: DarthVader   2012-10-24 12:10  

#7  "Lying bastards"

But we already knew that, Frank.

How can we tell Bambi and his minions are lying? Their lips are moving. >:-(
Posted by: Barbara   2012-10-24 11:58  

#6  Darth Bolton just held up a copy of one of the e-mails on Fox. While the recipient names were redacted (blocked out), the office symbols were not. Bolton named off a couple of very high ranking State Dept. offices.
Posted by: Besoeker   2012-10-24 11:32  

#5  With the rest of Fort Bragg being inhabited by the 82nd Airborne Division including the 2/505 Panthers.
Posted by: bman   2012-10-24 11:10  

#4  Only if people are paying attention.
Posted by: lotp   2012-10-24 11:00  

#3  Would this count as "The October Surprise"?

No amount of denial by the powers that be can erase the impact of finally being found out.
Posted by: Au Auric   2012-10-24 09:27  

#2  Lying bastards
Posted by: Frank G   2012-10-24 08:01  

#1  The emails, obtained from government sources not connected with U.S. intelligence agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity....

.......but whom wished to defend the constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, and are located at a remote area of Fort Bragg.
Posted by: Besoeker   2012-10-24 02:06  

00:00