General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI'm not a troll, and this Independent report concerns me.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/revealed-inside-story-of-us-envoys-assassination-8135797.htmlRachel Maddow highlighted this specific link in her morning email. Is she a troll?
P.S. I'm referring to the general reaction to the story in this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1338863
hlthe2b
(102,357 posts)--from a reputable source-- presents information that is not favorable to the administration.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)they claim the Obama admin knew about this ahead of time, I think the wording in the Independent is "learned" that this was the case. The Obama admin vehemently denies this as fact, BTW. Then the Independent story goes on about the actual attack but doesn't say much else (nothing at all) about the administration knowing about this ahead of time. I'm not saying they did or didn't but the story itself is making a claim that it doesn't really follow through on.
That's like me saying on a blog, "I heard that WillPitt cheered on the attacks in Libya," and then write about something else entirely. It isn't passing the smell test for me at the moment.
renie408
(9,854 posts)That is a long way from "Hey, somebody is going to kill Chris Stevens tomorrow".
And it was the anniversary of 9/11. The threat level most likely ALWAYS goes up on 9/11. I didn't really latch onto that single sentence in the entire article or assume that the entire article was aimed at showing that Obama/Clinton KNEW what was going on. I got that this was a much more planned attack than originally thought and that there might be some kind of inside element because someone stole papers with sensitive information.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)Revealed: inside story of US envoy's assassination
Exclusive: America 'was warned of embassy attack but did nothing'
That pretty much implies the Obama admin had info it ignored. The first paragraph as follows:
"The killings of the US ambassador to Libya and three of his staff were likely to have been the result of a serious and continuing security breach, The Independent can reveal."
The rest of the "report" says nothing about how "America 'was warned of embassy attack but did nothing'".
I agree there was probably some increased threat levels due to 9/11, there always seem to be but, IMO, you can't make a claim like the Independent does above and then report absolutely nothing on that claim.
renie408
(9,854 posts)I didn't even notice the grayed out part of the title. I saw "Revealed: inside story of US envoy's assassination", read the story and couldn't figure out why everybody was getting so worked up.
I was pretty baked last night, so that might explain it...
muriel_volestrangler
(101,361 posts)Mr Stevens had been on a visit to Germany, Austria and Sweden and had just returned to Libya when the Benghazi trip took place with the US embassy's security staff deciding that the trip could be undertaken safely.
gkhouston
(21,642 posts)I suspect it's not that unusual, and absent some indication of the nature of the threat or which embassies are targeted, it's not practical to put embassies on lockdown.
renie408
(9,854 posts)The article makes the threat sound more generalized than the subheading (which I didn't pay attention to and should have).
muriel_volestrangler
(101,361 posts)Egypts daily newspaper al-Masry al-Youm has reported that the countrys intelligence officials have said that they are warning of attacks by terror groups against both the American and Israeli embassies in the country.
According to the report, the newspaper said it obtained a letter sent to Deputy Interior Minister Sami Sidhom, where it claimed that the national security department told the ministry that terrorists in Egypt and Gaza [plan] to attack the embassies.
http://www.bikyamasr.com/77252/egypt-newspaper-cites-intelligence-as-saying-attacks-planned-against-us-israel-embaassies/
Published: Sept. 11, 2012 at 8:19 AM
A radical group plans to launch terrorist attacks against the Israeli and U.S. embassies in Cairo, the Egyptian Intelligence Service is warning.
A top secret letter obtained by the news organization al-Masry al-Youm states that elements from the group Global Jihad have been planning attacks on the two embassies.
The letter addressed to a top Egyptian security official was forwarded to all security sectors across Egypt, al-Masry al-Youm reported Tuesday.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2012/09/11/Egypt-Letter-warns-of-embassy-attacks/UPI-40211347365958/
It's Cairo, not Benghazi, and it included the Israeli embassy; but you might say that it should have indicated a highe state of alert than normal.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)is a lot different than "will be" and where. Again, I'm not saying that the information wasn't there for the administration but the reporting is sloppy. They make a grand claim, use unnamed sources, who may or may not, have an axe to grind with the administration. The report is not a smoking gun. Then when you have a Republican on the Intelligence committee denying this aspect of the story, you have to wonder about the facts of the story itself. I'd think if the Republicans had definitive proof that the Obama admin had prior, specific knowledge, they'd be all over the airwaves shouting it from the rooftops.
NavyDavy
(1,224 posts)anything
Robb
(39,665 posts)Something to do with the moon.
renie408
(9,854 posts)Yeah, that whole thread was bizarre.
As for the article, I agree. It is of major concern. And pretending like it just can't be true, when it very well could be, isn't smart.
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)I know the point your making, but this is not appropriate, IMO. We don't even call those women we don't like this name.
thecrow
(5,519 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Especially since the oh so special jury system let it stand.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,437 posts)I don't believe that Obama and/or Hillary would have been aware of this and done absolutely nothing
renie408
(9,854 posts)The only reference to prior knowledge of the State Department was this:
"the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted"
It does not say, "48 hours prior to the attacks, the US State Department received credible information that the consulate in Benghazi and the embassy in Cairo were going to be attacked."
It does not refer to specific missions being targeted. It states that the information that American missions may be targeted was received 48 hours before two such missions WERE attacked. It does not state how severe the information indicated the attacks would be, it does not state WHERE the attacks were going to be; it gives no specifics.
I am not sure why so many people think that it indicates that the White House knew that there were going to be attacks in those specific places and just didn't do anything about it. That isn't what it says at all.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,437 posts)I have little doubt though that the media isn't trying to find/hype SOMETHING about what happened the other day to fault Obama for, as well as to try to make George W. Bush's screw-up on 9/11 look not-so-bad, particularly with the recent release of a book claiming that Bush received MULTIPLE warnings prior to 9/11 and still did nothing.
Tennessee Gal
(6,160 posts)that the killing of the ambassador was an organized terrorist attack and not related to the demonstrations due to that film. She made some very valid points.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Just a surprise attack of a hundred plus armed men.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)So now the Middle East erupts in violence.
What a coincidence!
Those who DO want an attack on Iran are my first suspects in this latest wave of violence.
Big Picture: Someone is Trying to Precipitate "The Clash of Civilizations"
The film may be amateurish, but the use of patsies and cutouts is not.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)And he's a Republican.
Game over.
They just talked about it on CNN a few minutes ago.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)it makes the speculation less fun.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)Seems this framing is to counter the accusation that Bushco did not act in the face of warnings re 9-11.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)This is concerning, but as others have pointed out there is a bit of a gap between what is claimed and what seems to be substantiated. What exactly did they know and to what detail?
It also sounds like they had done some preparations for high alert (inadequate though they turned out to be).
Bryant
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)you find mention of this specific subject elsewhere :
"There is growing belief that the attack was in revenge for the killing in a drone strike in Pakistan of Mohammed Hassan Qaed, an al-Qa'ida operative who was, as his nom-de-guerre Abu Yahya al-Libi suggests, from Libya, and timed for the anniversary of the 11 September attacks."
It doesn't change the fact that the protests started as result of the Salafi TV channel in Egypt broadcasting details of contents of the film. Most people over there are unlikely to have seen the now removed Youtube clip - just heard of the contents by word of mouth.
It may be that the attack on the US ambassador was coincidental to disturbances caused by the film.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)The paper is owned by the Russian Mafia. By a guy who used to be in the KGB, no less. Your concern is noted. It's a tabloid. If you rely upon an ex-KGB operated paper, you are on thin ice. It's a whisper campaign to keep the race close. I stand with the US. This article is so critical of the US it isn't even funny. I don't care if you are left or right, but this article is so harsh against the US that NO ONE should take it seriously. LOL. Thanks again for your concern. Concern troll FAIL. Pure, unadulterated bullshit. Tripe. Smells like desperation. Right-of-center news source. Right-wing trying to facilitate an October surprise. Bullshit article. I stand with my president and his SoS. Un-named sources. I think this is less a "leak" and more "Republican foreign policy figures offering their version of reality". This is an attempt at Republican shit-stirring. It appears that the only ones that stink are themselves. If your concern is real... I'd BE SHOCKED. There's nothing there. Read the article. There's really nothing there when you dig deep. This will actually be beneficial to Obama IMO. Frankly the whole thing smacks of a Cheney production. Epic fail of a concern thread. I am old enough to remember when trolls actually had game. And I am old enough to remember that some of the trolls have stars and relatively high post counts. Now, bend over, touch your toes, and leave an opening large enough for Willard Romney to fit in.
At least according to the good DUers in this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021338863
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)!) Seventy years after the fact historians are still debating whether FDR knew an attack on Pearl Harbor was imminent.
2) Fifty years after the fact historians are still debating whether Viet Nam attacked our vessels in the Gulf Of Tonkin.
3) Over one hundred years after the fact historians are still discussing what happened to the USS Maine,
4) A decade and a Congressional hearing after the fact we still don't know if Bush* knew an attack by Al Qaeda was imminent.
And the answer to what happened to our embassy in Libya is not going to be answered in the fog of this campaign season except by some nutters and dead enders. Romney already has them. The problem is getting from 40% of the electorate to 50% is really hard....
grantcart
(53,061 posts)They are evaluated and appropriate action is taken.
All that means is that one of their information sources heard a rumor and their are hundreds a year and 99% turn out to be just rumors. The local embassy and CIA evaluate and recommend to Washington appropriate action.
Simply because it is from a 'credible source' doesn't mean that it was a credible threat, just that it got the information from a known source rather than an anonymous source or from someone who is known to make stuff up.
In fact there is no evidence that the rumor that is being cited here is related to the events that took place, it could have been one of hundreds that turned out to not be true.
If there was a real concern then the Embassy would have requested, and the State Department agreed, to close the Embassy and Consoluate until the situation was clarified, and the State Department would have contacted the host country to provide added protection.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Story Line One- There was a breach of security on behalf of Libyan security (entirely plausible)
Story Line Two- The act was premeditated at some low cell level (entirely plausible)
Story Line Three -The US knew their embassy was going to be attacked and elected to do nothing (entirely implausible)
grantcart
(53,061 posts)1) I find entirely implausible that Libyan security breached security before the attack because they have no access to anything secure in a consulate or embassy, they are on the sidewalk outside.
2) Is almost certainly true.
3) The US didn't "know" anything. It received a rumor from a credible source. All embassies, especially in the Middle East receive hundreds of threats that are evaluated by the Embassy and the CIA and appropriate action is taken. The fact that it was from a 'credible source' does not mean that it was found to be a credible rumor, and again there is no evidence that the information from that source was related to that particular attack. If the Embassies in the Middle East were closed for a week everytime they got a rumor that something was going to happen then all of our embassies in the Middle East, and many elsewhere in the world would never open.
All threats are passed on to both the State Department Security Assesment Center and to the CIA. They are evaluated based on what other credible sources are saying and action is taken based on that assesment. If the local Embassy had thought it credible they would have the authority to close the consulate and move the personnel to the Embassy until the threat had abated.
part man all 86
(367 posts)Somewhere on DU around 2 am est. it was shown to be nothing more than hot air. And Rachel has been wrong and when she is she apologizes. The news hit piece does not back up its hype but wanders like drunk reich wing teabillies on a Friday night. Also the Benghazi attack was at the consulate not the embassy and was a direct attack with no protesting according to one of the Libyan guard who help defend our guys. Also he said possibly one of their own gave the attackers the location of the safe house. This article is nothing more than inflammatory BS.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)Am I for real?
Yes, I was not reading DU at 2am.
Go outside.
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)Here's my thoughts:
We KNOW everyone in the government is on high alert pre-9/11 every year. We all are. Everyone heaves the inner sigh of relief over the unspoken thought , right?
If the military was on a heightened state of alert, so was the state department. I have heard they were.
The ambassador should have had security. Apparently he did. At least 2 ex-Seals provided security, and regular Libyan security, etc. The newspaper does not know what private warnings state department employees received.
The ambassador was liked by the Rebels for aiding them during the toppling of Gaddafi. One might assume his safety was assured especially if he was only dropping in for a quick visit in Benghazi.
Everyone involved fears that the terrorists will attack at anytime. They know the score. This week we are the victims. Next week we are the perpetrators. Seems like this is the new reality. There's no use pointing fingers.
ananda
(28,876 posts)Very informative.
aikoaiko
(34,183 posts)But it is not. You're not trolling.
Heck here is the video anyway because its funny (especially if you followed the boxxy meme thing).
Baitball Blogger
(46,757 posts)aikoaiko
(34,183 posts)[IMG][/IMG]
malaise
(269,157 posts)That's the first thing. Nothing sensitive should be outside of embassies.
Secondly do we really believe that Western forces could kill the President of Libya and create the chaos they did in Libya and not expect repercussions?
In the same way the West sees them as terrorists, they see the West as terrorists ad Gaddafi was no fly-by-night regime. Love him or hate him, his state's institutions were well established and sophisticated. This is spy versus spy.
What's more ReTHUGs see the Democratic party the same way the West sees the Middle East and will do anything for 'regime change'.
This is all way more complicated that we're inclined to believe. Sure I'm very upset that this mess is happening just before the elections but US foreign policy in the ME is not winning hearts or minds.
Jennicut
(25,415 posts)I really think there is nothing there or all the major news pundits would be falling all over themselves to report it.
annabanana
(52,791 posts)of the "safe house". It indicates to me that there was a mole, or someone else with inside information of the plans for the safety of Mr. Stevens.
maxrandb
(15,351 posts)I saw the Faux and Fiends "dittiots" beating this report like a red-headed stepchild. That...and the "reputation" of the "Independent" says all I need to know about this "report".
muriel_volestrangler
(101,361 posts)Its Middle East reporters and commentators include Robert Fisk and Patrick Cockburn. Both award-winning. Both DU favourites.
NavyDavy
(1,224 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,361 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)This sounds like hyped up nonsense.
woodsprite
(11,924 posts)of the senate intelligence committee said that after a 3 hour long meeting with the CIA director that nobody knew about this attack and that there was no way they could. They did have notice that there has been unrest there, and it's been getting worse, since the elections -- but no specifics. That was noted in a Pentagon report and written about in an article on their news web site.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Also, no named sources. The combination is evidence enough.
Baitball Blogger
(46,757 posts)Someone got a hold of sensitive information. Was it a mole?
Zorra
(27,670 posts)There is no reason to assume, as a matter of course, that it came from Julian.
The Wikileaks twitter account is a shared account.
Wikileaks Twitter
"We open governments.
Everywhere."
That said, who knows what Wikileaks knows?
Progressive dog
(6,918 posts)magical thyme
(14,881 posts)And I noticed when reading the article last evening that they promised supporting info in the first paragraph, and failed to deliver it.
I think there is a lot more to the story than any news rags have right now.
The most chilling thing I have read this morning is that there are "safe zones" within Libya and throughout the region where jihadists are allowed "free play" to help overthrow regimes in Syria and elsewhere. And that al Qaeda has been able to exploit those areas to prepare their own attacks.
It points to the challenges of our dealings in the region. Really, I think all this comes down to is blowback against 50+ years of asserting too much military power over others for the purpose of cheap oil and unlimited growth.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)They are not the Telegraph or the Times. And they are certainly not the Mail.
NavyDavy
(1,224 posts)jsr
(7,712 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)Jeff In Milwaukee
(13,992 posts)You've been biding your time, haven't you?
bigtree
(86,005 posts)I'll be 'concerned' when a more conclusive report comes out.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)WI_DEM
(33,497 posts)but I think Obama should hold a press conference and answer all questions. I have faith in the integrity of the president and if he says they didn't know or weren't aware of this then I believe them.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)That's all he and any president will do...
mick063
(2,424 posts)And how could you with MSNBC? Rachel came out with the truth. It could be damaging, but the honesty gives her and her network credibility.
This is why MSNBC is not just like FOX.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)just the attention it got. So I didn't. I thought I would wait and see if another source picked it up and investigated it. But it's too bad we can't put stuff up on developing stories that is maybe iffy for all to see and draw their own conclusions without the usual attack squad arriving.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)by posters who consistently find it necessary to attack progressives who believe that it is critical to question the authority of the status quo.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)I just didn't have the time to do battle with them.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Answer: He believed that he was safe because he routinely worked with Libyan militant groups in the area. He was the US coordinator in Bengahzi during the uprising against Ghadaffi, and has been liaison with Libyan Jihadi groups fighting in Syria. These same Libyan groups provide much of the manpower with Saudi and western backing now fighting to overthrow the Syrian regime.
Some background: The Ambassador arrived clandestinely in Benghazi in April 2011 on a Greek freighter and took up residence in that city to coordinate the US role in the anti-Ghadafi uprising centered in that city. It was his presence there, to a major degree, that ultimately convinced President Obama to okay US involvement in the NATO airstrikes that destroyed the regime's armored column approaching that city.
In a statement of condolence issued by the Libyan Ambassador to the United States, Stevens "served as the principal liaison of the U.S. to the opposition in Libya and he helped coordinate the U.S. response" to events on the ground, including efforts to rebuild and integrate radical Islamists into the government. http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/12/u-s-ambassador-to-libya-3-others-killed-in-rocket-attack-witness-says/
Francis Townsend, a ranking Bush White House counterterrorism advisor was close to Stevens, CNN reported: http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/12/townsend-libya-suffers-fragile-security/?iref=obinsite
"I was in Tripoli on a business trip," she said. "He was not only a friend, but I think to give our viewers some context, Chris Stevens had a particular sort of affinity for Benghazi," she said. "He [was] in D.C. in 2007 when I was in the White House...He was there with me when I traveled to speak to Moammar Ghadafi. [Stevens] knew the rebels in Benghazi. He felt very comfortable there.
Prior to his appointment as US Ambassador to Libya, he has been posted in virtually every major Mideast country involved in the current civil war in Syria. From the Wiki:
He served twice previously in Libya, as the Deputy Chief of Mission from 2007 to 2009 and as Special Representative to the National Transitional Council from March 2011 to November 2011 during the Libyan revolution. He arrived in Tripoli in May 2012 as the U.S. Ambassador to Libya.
The assault on the US Consulate in Benghazi appears to have been well-coordinated involving experienced fighters. Initial accounts point to an al-Qaeda affiliated group that has carried out other armed attacks on western targets in the area, as having been responsible.
They also note that the attack immediately followed a call from al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri for revenge for the death in June of a senior Libyan member of the terror group Abu Yahya al-Libi.
The group suspected to be behind the assault -- the Imprisoned Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades -- first surfaced in May, when it claimed responsibility for an attack on the International Red Cross office in Benghazi. The following month the group claimed responsibility for detonating an explosive device outside the U.S. Consulate, and later released a video of that attack.
Read more: http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/world/omar-abdul-rahman-brigades-ambassador-christopher-stevens-targeted-by-pro-al-qaeda-group#ixzz26IvGSLtY
That group, however, is only a fragment of a far larger conglomeration of Jihadi terrorist groups that have originate in, and openly train and operate, in eastern Libya. Little has apparently been done to suppress these groups, which have been up until now free of the sort of armed drone attacks against similar groups in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen. Ironically, Stevens catalogued a number of al-Qaeda groups in a 2008 State Dept. cable he put together at the time many of these groups were still actively carrying out their holy war against US and Shi'ia targets in Iraq.
CNN also reports:
In recent months, hardline Salafists have increasingly asserted themselves in eastern Libya. In June hundreds of fighters wielding AK-47s and black Islamist banners converged on Benghazi to call for the imposition of sharia law. This spring al-Zawahiri's associate Azuz was confident enough to address a large gathering in the town square of Derna, an online video of which has been seen by CNN.
Collectively, some of the Salafist and jihadist elements in eastern Libya began to become known as Ansar al Sharia, or "Partisans of Sharia." According to reports, eyewitnesses have claimed Ansar al Sharia was responsible for organizing the demonstration outside the U.S. Consulate. But Benotman told CNN Ansar al Sharia is not really a grouping at all but rather a term applied to an amorphous coalition of Islamist and Salafist groups in eastern Libya with no leadership structure.
The Libyan Province which contains Benghazi and Derna was noted in a 2007 West Point study of the origin of the majority of suicide bombers in Iraq.
The most striking finding which emerges from the West Point study is that the corridor which goes from Benghazi to Tobruk, passing through the city of Darnah (also transliterated as Derna) them represents one of the greatest concentrations of jihadi terrorists to be found anywhere in the world, and by some measures can be regarded as the leading source of suicide bombers anywhere on the planet. Darnah, with one terrorist fighter sent into Iraq to kill Americans for every 1,000 to 1,500 persons of population, emerges as suicide bomber heaven, easily surpassing the closest competitor, which was Riyad, Saudi Arabia.
According to West Point authors Joseph Felter and Brian Fishman, Saudi Arabia took first place as regards absolute numbers of jihadis sent to combat the United States and other coalition members in Iraq during the time frame in question. Libya, a country less than one fourth as populous, took second place. Saudi Arabia sent 41% of the fighters. According to Felter and Fishman, Libya was the next most common country of origin, with 18.8% (112) of the fighters listing their nationality stating they hailed from Libya. Other much larger countries were far behind: Syria, Yemen, and Algeria were the next most common origin countries with 8.2% (49), 8.1% (48), and 7.2% (43), respectively. Moroccans accounted for 6.1% (36) of the records and Jordanians 1.9% (11). [2]
This means that almost one fifth of the foreign fighters entering Iraq across the Syrian border came from Libya, a country of just over 6 million people. A higher proportion of Libyans were interested in fighting in Iraq than any other country contributing mujahedin. Felter and Fishman point out: Almost 19 percent of the fighters in the Sinjar Records came from Libya alone. Furthermore, Libya contributed far more fighters per capita than any other nationality in the Sinjar Records, including Saudi Arabia. [3]
[1] Joseph Felter and Brian Fishman, Al Qaidas Foreign Fighter in Iraq: A First Look at the Sinjar Records, (West Point, NY: Harmony Project, Combating Terrorism Center, Department of Social Sciences, US Military Academy, December 2007). Cited as West Point Study.
[2] Op. cit.
[3] West Point Study, pp. 8-9.
Also, see, Daya Gamage, Libyan rebellion has radical Islamist fervor: Benghazi link to Islamic militancy, U.S. Military Document Reveals, Asian Tribune, March 17, 2011. http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2011/03/17/libyan-rebellion-has-radical-islamist-fervor-benghazi-link-islamic-militancyus-milit
Indeed, eastern Libya is a primary recruiting ground for Jihadi terrorists being drawn into the U.S. and Saudi/GCC regime change operation in Syria. The unfortunate death of the Ambassador Wednesday can be viewed as yet another instance of the sort of blowback that occurred on a larger scale 11 years earlier when US intelligence allowed al Qaeda cell members -- who had fought in Bosnia and Kosovo in operations coordinated by U.S. intelligence -- into the U.S. and failed to stop them before they carried the killings of thousands of Americans. Our continued involvement in the bloody religious war in Syria, and our apparent failure to learn from repeated fatal mistakes in cooperating with terrorists in covert wars, virtually assures that this will not be the last such instance of blowback.
eridani
(51,907 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)The White House has no information to suggest that the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was pre-planned, Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters Friday. "The unrest we have seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that many muslims find offensive," Carney said.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/white-house-spox-no-information-to-suggest-libya
The media should not be in the business of spreading RW conspiracy theories.
The RW inflamed the situation, and Mitt has now effectively poured gasoline on the fire.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)I want proof.
reorg
(3,317 posts)according to the British "counter-terrorism think tank" Quilliam:
...
According to our sources, the attack against the Consulate had two waves. The first attack led to US officials being evacuated from the consulate by Libyan security forces, only for the second wave to be launched against US officials after they were kept in a secure location.
http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/press-releases/the-attack-on-the-us-consulate-was-a-planned-terrorist-assault-against-us-and-libyan-interests/
ProSense
(116,464 posts)the neocons (http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/about/staff/us-advisors/) want to push this as an act of terrorism.
Chad Sweet
Michael P. Davidson
reorg
(3,317 posts)Maajid Nawaz is Co-Founder and Chairman of Quilliam a globally active think tank focusing on matters of Integration, Citizenship & Identity, Religious Freedom, Extremism and Immigration and Founder of Khudi, a Pakistan based social movement campaigning to entrench democratic culture among the nations youth.
Human Rights and a respect for individual liberty are matters close to Maajids heart. His work is informed by years spent in his youth as a leadership member of a global Islamist group, and his gradual transformation towards liberal democratic values. Having served four years as an Amnesty International adopted prisoner of conscience in Egypt, Maajid is now a leading critic of his former Islamist ideological dogma, while remaining a Muslim. He now encourages inclusive citizenship-based participation of Muslims in the West, while seeking to synergize a respect for human rights with the civic liberal imperative to defend those in danger of being stigmatized by extremists of all stripes due to their personal choices. Maajid has become a prominent counter-extremism consultant and a regular writer, debater and public commentator. In this regard, he has been called upon by heads of state, statesmen and international bodies for his professional opinion.
http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/about/staff/maajid-nawaz-2/
Noman Benotman: President
Noman Benotman has been appointed as Senior Analyst (Strategic Communications and De-Radicalisation) at Quilliam.
He is leading Quilliams work on de-radicalisation processes in the UK and abroad, working to raise international awareness of Jihadist recantations, co-ordinating Quilliams outreach to current and former extremists and using Quilliam as a platform from which to share his inside knowledge of al-Qaeda and other Jihadist groups with a wider audience.
Born in Libya in 1967, Noman Benotman first adopted radical Islamism in the mid-1980s after reading the books of Sayyid Qutb. In 1989 he travelled to Afghanistan where he fought against the Soviet Union, taking part in battles around Khost, Gardez and elsewhere. After the Soviet withdrawal, he helped set up the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group which aimed to violently overthrow Colonel Gaddafi and establish an Islamic state in Libya. In 1994, he moved to Sudan where he forged close links with Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and other key members of al-Qaeda. Since 1995 he has lived in London where he was initially part of the Londonistan scene alongside other senior extremists such as Abu Qatada and Abu Musab al-Suri before gradually distancing himself from Islamism.
http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/about/staff/noman-benotman/
mmonk
(52,589 posts)Actually, this all smells of neocons. Yes, there is more to it than meets the eye.
just1voice
(1,362 posts)Fail fail fail fail.
Zax2me
(2,515 posts)Really?
'Oh, let's protest this movie at the US embassy -
hey! Pick up that rocket launcher - take out the US ambassador'
Ooops!
Please.....
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)... was in revenge for the killing in a drone strike in Pakistan of Mohammed Hassan Qaed, an al-Qa'ida operative who was, as his nom-de-guerre Abu Yahya al-Libi suggests, from Libya, and timed for the anniversary of the 11 September attacks."
Should we be surprised when our highly illegal drone assassination program begins reaping precisely what it sows?