Bloggers Call BS on NY Times Benghazi Article

7 Comments

1. 

   Oui on December 29, 2013 at 4:20 pm

   .
   Cross-posted from yesterday’s fp story by BooMan – Please Proceed Republicans.

   At least the myth the Libyan security forces of February 17 Brigade who “defended” the US Ambassador has been debunked in the NY Times article. The paid security militia just ran away and avoided any confrontation. The Brigade Headquarters joined Ansar al-Shariah leaders in coordinating the attack. It’s as close as an insider attack can happen. Where lies the separation between a multitude of local militia like Ansar al-Shariah and the hundreds of Afghan mujahideen present to fight in Libya against western powers, the infidels.

   By conducting the high-profile raid that captured senior al Qaeda terrorist Abu Anas al Libi in Tripoli, the administration is likely alerting the Benghazi terrorists and possibly driving them into hiding.

   The U.S. official said the locations of several attackers behind the Sept. 11 armed assault on the diplomatic compound in Benghazi and a nearby CIA facility are known. The group Ansar al Sharia, which has links to al Qaeda, has been identified as behind the attack that killed U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

   The investigation by The Times shows that the reality in Benghazi was different, and murkier, than either of those story lines suggests. Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs.

   Mr. Abu Khattala had become well known in Benghazi for his role in the killing of a rebel general, and then for declaring that his fellow Islamists were insufficiently committed to theocracy. He made no secret of his readiness to use violence against Western interests. One of his allies, the leader of Benghazi’s most overtly anti-Western militia, Ansar al-Shariah, boasted a few months before the attack that his fighters could “flatten” the American Mission. Surveillance of the American compound appears to have been underway at least 12 hours before the assault started.

   …
   Witnesses at the scene of the attack identified many participants associated with Ansar al-Shariah. Mr. Abu Khattala’s presence and leadership were evident. He initially hung back, standing near the crowd at Venezia Road, several witnesses said. But a procession of fighters hurried to him out of the smoke and gunfire, addressed him as “sheikh” and then gave him reports or took his orders before plunging back into the compound.

   A local Benghazi official named Anwar el-Dos arrived on the scene and identified Mr. Abu Khattala as directing the fighters, people present said. Then Mr. Dos approached Mr. Abu Khattala for help entering the compound. The two drove into the mission in Mr. Abu Khattala’s pickup truck, the witnesses said. As he moved forward, the fighters parted to let them pass.

   …
   At the militias’ so-called joint operations room inside the February 17 [Martyr’s] Brigade headquarters, the commander in charge was Mr. Bargathi of the militia called the Preventive Security Brigade. He had also been a friend and neighbor of Mr. Abu Khattala since childhood.

   He said he immediately radioed the Libyan guards in the compound and told them not to resist the assault. “I told them: ‘Don’t shoot. Just run away from the place,’ ” he said. “Because I knew that it was not wise to provoke. These are not like normal attackers, and it might enrage them more. They might kill everyone inside.”

   He volunteered that the leaders of Ansar al-Shariah had joined him in the operations room shortly after the attack began — underscoring the permeability of the line between threat and protector among Benghazi militias.

   ○ Libyans Killed Its Best Ambassador, Chris Stevens – A Tribute
   ○ Feds Hired Unlisted British Security Firm for Benghazi Consulate
   ○ From “Proud” To Pulled: A Timeline Of 60 Minutes’ Benghazi Trainwreck

2. 

   Oui on December 30, 2013 at 4:14 am

   .

   On The Semantics

   Meet the Press also spoke to David Kirkpatrick, the New York Times reporter who wrote the investigative piece. Kirkpatrick explained that this attack was very clearly perpetrated by local militant Islamists.

   Was it perpetrated by the group founded by Osama bin Laden? Kirkpatrick says it was very clearly not.

   Video interview David Kirkparick

   On this morning’s MEET THE PRESS, New York Times’ Cairo Bureau Chief David Kirkpatrick spoke with David Gregory on the publication’s recent Benghazi reveal, saying “I don’t think I’m out on a limb there… There’s just no chance that this was an Al Qaeda attack if, by Al Qaeda, you mean the organization founded by Osama bin Laden.”

   ○ Susan Rice: No time to think about Benghazi
   ○ Rep. Peter King has ‘nothing but contempt’ for New York Times (2011)
3. 

   Oui on December 30, 2013 at 4:47 am

   .
   Geez, how many times does Prof. Juan Cole need to be told he was wrong in his analysis of the Arab Spring. He bet on the Muslim Brotherhood as champions of democracy after the people’s protest. Juan Cole was wrong on Libya, Egypt, now Turkey and the Muslim Brothers’ sponsor Qatar. Grabbing the Kirkpatrick storytale for his very own propositions.

   Benghazi Consular attack was Local, not al-Qaeda: NYT Correspondent Demolishes GOP Talking Points

   David D. Kirkpatrick at the New York Times has settled the controversy over events in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, by actually going to Benghazi and digging into the story. Admittedly, it was a somewhat dangerous assignment, but Kirkpatrick risked it.

   The take-away of this careful investigation, depending on a range of interviews with Libyans who had been at the scene of the attack on the US consulate in the Libyan port city, is that al-Qaeda had nothing to do with it.

   …
   On the occasion of the appearance of Kirkpatrick’s important reportage, I’ll leave you with my own deconstruction of the false GOP narrative, from last year. I think it is largely vindicated by what Kirkpatrick was able to find out on the ground.

   ○ MB Axis Egypt – Turkey – Qatar Faces Defeat
   ○ Obama Administration Backed Muslim Brotherhood
   ○ Al Jazeera and Qatar: The Muslim Brothers’ Dark Empire?

   • 

     Marie2 on December 30, 2013 at 4:44 pm

     He was bound to get one correct.  While I’m not wild about how the NYTimes article was written, and not convinced that the ringleader they identified had any more involvement in the attack on the Benghazi State Dept compound other than showing up after the melee began, it is consistent with all the available solid evidence.

     • 

       Oui on December 31, 2013 at 2:15 am

       The so-called investigation talking to people months after the event has no substance. He doesn’t come forward with names of witnesses or with any new evidence. If you read his October 2012 article, it’s written with the same intent and conclusions. Kirkpatrick has expressed himself in 7,000 words, but two main issues is what was meant for the headlines: no involvement of Al Qaeda and the attack was not pre-planned but evolved as the anger over the film took hold on September 11. The “protest” came to fruition at 20:30 hours in the evening? For me as false as can be and he writes nothing that hadn’t been written before. He leaves out more essentials in his long tale. As some others have now written: a white-wash.

       Abu Khattala was the ringleader and the militia of Ansar al-Shariah was responsible. The agenda wasn’t local but had al the intent and goal of the Al Qaeda affiliate: a revenge attack on a soft American target. The February 17 Brigade was complicit which proves the attack was pre-planned.

       The extensive statement from a witness I quoted from France24 article has proven correct. That was written in my first diary after the attack.

       The Libyans most likely were driven by the martyrdom of Abu Yahya al-Libi, a quote from report: Al Qaeda in Libya [pdf].
       “Particular attention has been given to AQSL and AQIM sources, especially propaganda videos featuring their leaders and a
       written essay from ‘Atiyah al-Libi, an influential Libyan al-Qaeda leader killed in Pakistan by a U.S. drone strike in August 2011.”

       • 

         Marie2 on December 31, 2013 at 12:18 pm

         We’re going to have to agree to disagree on this one.  Eyewitness testimony or reports aren’t terribly reliable even when gathered quickly after an event.  In this case the situation is further compounded by cultural and language barriers when speaking with Benghazi residents or natives.  And the US personnel aren’t any better — with some seeking to elevate their role into “Rambo” icons or in the confusion and dark didn’t see/experience much to begin with.

         The compound video recordings and compound site forensics simply don’t support a planned and organized attack.  Had that been the story, that CIA rescue team would never have been able to enter the compound and the compound would have been leveled.  Instead it looked more like the destruction seen after a riot.

         That said, I doubt that those that initiated the attack on the “Annex” were the same as those that initiated the breach of the compound.  With the cover blown on the annex, it became target for one or more groups and they took a couple of hours to organize the assault. The reason for it may be as simple as it was known that the CIA had been amassing arsenals and getting weapons for free is a hard habit to break.

         Once I could see that the attack on the annex was a distinct event from the attack on the compound, the storyline because much clearer.    

       • 

         Oui on January 8, 2014 at 3:24 pm

         .
         US State Illustrates NYT Kirkpatrick’s Fallacy on Benghazi Raid

         Not a bit surprised by these new revelations about the Al Qaeda militants now suspect in the Benghazi raid. Evene earlier NY Times reports clarified the rag-tag Islamist militants with obscure backgrounds the US were supporting in the overthrow of Colonel Gaddafi in 2011. See my earlier statements on Kirkpatrick’s NY Times “investigation” – Bloggers Call BS on NY Times Benghazi Article.

         Ex-Guantanamo detainee suspected in attack

         (AFP/Stuff.nz) – US officials suspect a former Guantanamo Bay detainee played a role in the attack on the American compound in Benghazi, Libya, and are planning to designate the group he leads as a foreign terrorism organisation, according to officials with the plans.

         Militiamen under the command of Abu Sufian bin Qumu [aka Abu Sufian Hamouda], the leader of Ansar al-Sharia in the Libyan city of Darnah, participated in the attack that killed US Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, US officials said.

         Witnesses have told American officials that Qumu’s men were in Benghazi before the attack took place on September 11, 2011, according to the officials.

         ○ Daily Beast: Yes, There IS Evidence Linking al Qaeda to Benghazi

         Full story posted as a diary @BooMan – US State Illustrates NYT Kirkpatrick’s Fallacy on Benghazi Raid.