White House Press Secretary Jay Carney today sought to defend a newly released email from a White House communications adviser, prepping then-U.S. ambassador to the UN Susan Rice for her round of interviews about the Benghazi attack.
“This document was not about Benghazi,” Carney told ABC’s Jonathan Karl.
“It is often forgotten that during that time period there was an enormous amount of attention and focus, appropriately, on the fact that there were protesters, sometimes violent protesters, surrounding U.S. embassies, causing us to draw down personnel at those embassies, causing great concern, understandably, about the safety of American personnel at other diplomatic facilities around the Muslim world. And that was a focus of a great deal of press attention, and thus would be, as the promos indicate, one of the areas of focus of those Sunday shows.”
The e-mail from National Security Council communications adviser Ben Rhodes, lists as a “goal” of Rice’s round of interviews “to show that these protests were rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.”
The video Rhodes referenced was an anti-Muslim YouTube video that sparked other protests in the Muslim world.
To the families of the four Americans killed in the Benghazi terrorist attack, I offer my deepest sympathy and condolences;
But however, to folks referring to this event as some sort of political “cover-up” for some reason including that “Al Qaeda” still lives, so Obama couldn’t take credit for squashing them, I have to say, please stop bending our ears.
Al Qaeda does happen to be the largest Islamic terrorist group in the world, but somewhere I read that there are about 60 of these terrorist groups
And as a matter of fact the Islamic terrorist group responsible for the Benghazi attack was a group called “Ansar al-Sharia”:
2012 U.S. Consulate attack in Benghazi
On September 11, 2012, the United States Department of State Operations Center advised the White House Situation Room and other U.S. security units that Ansar al-Sharia was claiming responsibility for the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi that had just occurred. Witnesses said they saw vehicles with the group’s logo at the scene of the assault and that fighters there acknowledged at the time that they belonged to Ansar al-Sharia. Witnesses also said they saw Ahmed Abu Khattala, a commander of Ansar al-Sharia, leading the embassy attack, a claim Mr. Khattala denied. According to longwarjournal.org, the group issued a statement asserting that it “didn’t participate as a sole entity” and that the attack “was a spontaneous popular uprising” to an anti-Islam film.
As of 6 August 2013, U.S. officials confirmed that Ahmed Abu Khattala (Khattalah), Libyan leader of Ansar al-Sharia, has been charged with playing a significant role in last year’s attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi. According to NBC, the charges were filed under seal in Washington, D.C. in late July. Authorities have not said whether he has been arrested in Libya.
Ansar al-Sharia is a jihadist group that was ultimately blamed for the terrorist attack that resulted in the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi on 9/11/12.
Furthermore, some of our media seems to be so intent on labeling the Benghazi event as some sort of “cover up” that they don’t seem to have any qualms about distorting the facts …
why couldn’t the “TERRORIST” attack have also been triggered by the film which supposedly mocks the Islamic prophet?
the New York Times met with Ahmed Abu Khattala — leader in the Ansar al-Sharia militia suspected by the Libyan and U.S. governments of taking part in the attack — in a Benghazi hotel. While Abu Khattala claimed that he himself did not take part in the assault, he said the attack grew out of a protest against the video.
Finally, poor Hilary has had to hear her comment misconstrued over and over, so I’m just giving her entire comment here:
“With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans,” she said. “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.”
Also imho this sounds more like a Republican attempt to smear Hilary for the next election than it sounds like a “cover up” to me
And although Obama did conclude that Benghazi was a “terrorist attack”, would it really be any big deal if afterwards someone just called it an attack?