Instead, these militant-Islamic killers calmly aimed their weapons at Americans and murdered them without the distraction of the U. As Jack Cashill recounted for AmericanThinker. They discussed the still-devolving calamity for 15 to 30 minutes. They then returned to the Pentagon to handle the crisis. Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment: to empower through understanding.
Financial contributions from our readers are a critical part of supporting our resource-intensive work and help us keep our journalism free for all.
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today to help us keep our work free for all. Cookie banner We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our site, show personalized content and targeted ads, analyze site traffic, and understand where our audiences come from.
By choosing I Accept , you consent to our use of cookies and other tracking technologies. Is the Obama Administration to blame for Benghazi? Reddit Pocket Flipboard Email. Everything you need to know about Benghazi. Forced into answering these two questions, the Obama administration struggled to appease the American people, as well as Congress, about the true nature of the Benghazi tragedy.
Speaking in the Rose Garden on September 12, , President Obama referred to the Benghazi attacks as "acts of terror. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton echoed President Obama's remarks, adding that the administration was not certain about all of the details, or levels of planning, behind the attacks: "We are working to determine the precise motivations and methods of those who carried out this assault.
The anti-Muslim video, entitled Innocence of Muslims, had incensed multitudes worldwide, but was met with a particularly virulent response in the Middle East. Even a cursory review of recent Libyan history makes the administration's initial stance on Benghazi appear reasonable. In the years leading up to the Benghazi attacks, perceived slights against Islam had spurred several instances of violence in Libya: "a assault by local Islamists that had destroyed an Italian diplomatic mission in Benghazi over a perceived insult to the prophet… In June, the group [Ansar al-Sharia] staged a similar attack against the Tunisian Consulate over a different film, according to the Congressional testimony of the American security chief at the time, Eric A.
In his press briefing on September 14th, Jay Carney followed the company line, harping incessantly on Innocence of Muslims, which Carney communicated as the reason behind the violence in Benghazi: "It is in response not to United States policy, not to obviously the administration, not to the American people.
It is in response to a video, a film… that is offensive to Muslims. Throughout the press briefing, Carney's responses to Benghazi questioning reflect a strong sense of campaign awareness. The White House Press Secretary defended against the Romney camp's criticisms of President Obama's preparedness and response to Benghazi, and Carney added that Obama has a better relationship with the "Muslim World" than when he entered office.
In the days immediately after the Benghazi attacks, tentative initial reports offered from intelligence agencies, such as the CIA, became low-hanging fruit for those intent on criticizing the Obama administration. When U. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan E. Rice went on early morning talk shows on September 16th, she responded to Benghazi questions with the official CIA talking points: "The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.
Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations. By September 13th, anonymous State Department officials were communicating to the press that the Benghazi incident was a "clearly planned attack," not a spontaneous response to Innocence of Muslims.
Were American intelligence agencies suffering from poor data gathering procedures? Were clashing political entities manufacturing divergent claims in order to achieve partisan gains?
Or did the immediate politicization of the Benghazi events inappropriately pressure the intelligence community into supplying incomplete statements, with the understanding that further updates were on their way? The CIA insisted that immediately following the attack, its agents were collecting evidence that showed both spontaneity and planning—with perpetrators described as a "flash mob with weapons" who displayed "some pre-coordination but minimal planning"—but politicians and the American public were clamoring for a tidier description.
The NCC report from September 14 states: "As time progresses, we are learning more, but we still don't have a complete picture of what happened… At this point, we are not aware of any actionable intelligence that this attack was planned or imminent. We are very cautious about drawing any firm conclusions at this point with regard to identification and motivation of the attackers.
Late September erupted with political controversy due to Olsen's new testimony regarding Benghazi. For more than a week, several awkward situations arose wherein a Libyan government representative would publicly renounce the Benghazi terrorist attacks, just so an American official could follow up by denouncing Innocence of Muslims, while refusing to speak about the level of planning or nature of the attacks. Political conservatives had argued since the beginning that "the White House knew on day one that al-Qaeda terrorists were responsible," 14 but that did not stop President Obama from maintaining his initial viewpoint about a spontaneous-protest-turned-violent.
Was the president intentionally misleading the American people? On the evening of September 18th, just a day before Olsen's remarks to the Senate, Obama appeared on The Late Show with David Letterman and reaffirmed that the Innocence of Muslims YouTube video was used as an excuse for Benghazi extremists, but the president did not refer to the events in Benghazi as planned terrorist attacks.
Sandy Winnefeld—provided a classified briefing to the Senate on the Benghazi attacks. One Republican Senator referred to the cagey briefing as a "onehour filibuster. For others, the tension between Congress and the Obama administration over Benghazi embodied a unique case of the administration striving to push an incident onto the political backburner for campaign reasons, even as Congress— and the American public—demanded greater attention on the matter.
Americans witnessed contradictory Benghazi narratives and did not know who was to blame: politics or the intelligence community. One fact is clear: President Obama was remarkably hesitant to publicly label the Benghazi events as terrorist attacks, even after the president of Libya, Secretary of State Clinton, White House Press Secretary Carney, and numerous officials from the intelligence community had claimed the events to be terrorist attacks.
However, it was not until the end of September that President Obama called the Benghazi events terrorist attacks. Even on September 12th, the day that he referred to the Benghazi attacks as "acts of terror," President Obama told CBS reporter Steve Kroft that "it's too early to know" whether the attack constituted a terrorist attack.
Throughout September, Obama consistently deflected opportunities to label or elaborate on the nature of the Benghazi attacks, with the president instead routinely claiming "we're still doing an investigation. Obama must have been aware that American intelligence agencies' investigations were slow to get underway.
Even two weeks after the attack, FBI investigators were not allowed in Benghazi, the crime scene hadn't been secured, and "the FBI's request to directly question individuals who Libyan authorities have in custody was denied.
Unfortunately, the investigation process has been plagued by more than its unbelievably late start. The administration urged intelligence agencies and law enforcement groups to "work not only with Libya but with other nations in the region to investigate the attack," which meant a lengthy investigation process—helping to push determinate and public results outside of election season.
On September 26th, Libyan President Mohamed Magariaf reiterated his initial statement that the "preplanned act of terrorism" in Benghazi was committed by "Al-Qaeda elements who are hiding in Libya.
0コメント