Via ABC (Sep 14, 2012) :
Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, the top Democrat on the House Intel committee, said Petraeus laid out “a chronological order exactly what we felt happened, how it happened, and where we’re going in the future.”
“In the Benghazi area, in the beginning we feel that it was spontaneous – the protest- because it went on for two or three hours, which is very relevant because if it was something that was planned, then they could have come and attacked right away,” Ruppersberger, D-Md., said following the hour-long briefing by Petraeus. “At this point it looks as if there was a spontaneous situation that occurred and that as a result of that, the extreme groups that were probably connected to al Qaeda took advantage of that situation and then the attack started.”
Petraeus did not speak to reporters on his way in or out of the briefing. When he left the meeting, the former four-star general was trailed by about a dozen intelligence officials and a couple of Capitol police officers.
Except we now know there were no ‘spontaneous’ protests. And I wonder why Petraeus is being so quiet.
Via WSJ (Oct 21, 2012):
The October surprise is that the final presidential debate may be the last chance before the election to clarify who knew what, and when, about the role of an anti-Islam Internet video in the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. For weeks, instead of blaming organized Islamist terrorists, the Obama administration claimed this made-in-America video turned demonstrators into killers.
A timeline disproves the administration’s story. The murder of four Americans, including the ambassador to Libya and two Navy SEALs, happened on the anniversary of Sept. 11, but the relevant facts start earlier:
In March, the State Department’s regional security officer on the ground, Eric Nordstrom, began asking for additional security for Benghazi. He was rebuffed. “It was abundantly clear: We were not going to get resources until the aftermath of an incident,” he said in congressional testimony this month.
In April, two Libyans threw a bomb over the fence of the consulate. In June, assailants blew a hole “big enough for 40 men to go through” in the consulate’s north gate.
The infamous video was posted on YouTube in July. The amateurish 14-minute trailer did lead to protests in many cities, but not in Benghazi the night of the attack.
On Sept. 8, the Libyan militia protecting the consulate cited numerous threats and called the security situation “frightening.” On Sept. 10, al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri called on Libyans to avenge the death of his Libyan deputy in a drone strike in Pakistan.
On Sept. 11, armed gunmen attacked and torched the Benghazi consulate. Eyewitness accounts, including live ones on the BBC, described dozen of members of the Islamist group Ansar al-Shariah, which has close ties to al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, entering the consulate armed with rocket-propelled grenades.
Nevertheless, President Obama’s Rose Garden remarks on Sept. 12 began by blaming the video: “We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence.” Note: “violence,” not “terrorism.” He concluded with a reference to terror—but in the context of recalling the 9/11 attacks of 2001, not the events in Benghazi.
Obama and his crew are lying through their collective teeth on this.