Skip to main content

David Ignatius has a great piece at WAPO on the Benghazi attacks and why Willard is painting himself into a corner by politicizing the attacks.

CIA talking points and initial assessment match what the administration has said in public. So much for the right wing's concocted outrage over Benghazi. You can just about count on the President mentioning the CIA assessment at the debate Monday.

Willard is proving to be as inept at foreign policy, as his domestic policy. Seems to me the only thing foreign he knows how to do is ship jobs overseas to China to fatten his bank account.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

The Romney campaign may have misfired with its suggestion that statements by President Obama and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice about the Benghazi attack last month weren’t supported by intelligence, according to documents provided by a senior U.S. intelligence official.
“Talking points” prepared by the CIA on Sept. 15, the same day that Rice taped three television appearances, support her description of the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate as a reaction to Arab anger about an anti-Muslim video prepared in the United States. According to the CIA account, “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”

The CIA document went on: “This assessment may change as additional information is collected and analyzed and as currently available information continues to be evaluated.” This may sound like self-protective boilerplate, but it reflects the analysts’ genuine problem interpreting fragments of intercepted conversation, video surveillance and source reports.

Tags

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (19+ / 0-)

    Change will not come if we wait for some other person or if we wait for some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.

    by First Amendment on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 04:26:31 PM PDT

  •  LA Times also has some information.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    subtropolis

    It would appears that original information may have been close to what actually happened after all.

    The assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi last month appears to have been an opportunistic attack rather than a long-planned operation, and intelligence agencies have found no evidence that it was ordered by Al Qaeda, according to U.S. officials and witnesses interviewed in Libya.
    Republicans began portraying the attack as the work of Al Qaeda, and they accused the administration of deliberately seeking to downplay that possibility.

    Now, however, said another official with access to the intelligence, "it may turn out that the initial assessment was not that far off."

    http://www.latimes.com/...

    "I'd like to find your inner child and kick it's little ass." -Don Henley.

    by Olkate on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 05:44:46 PM PDT

  •  Americans are lost in the labyrinth of lies made (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    subtropolis

    by rightwingers, but good diary!

    It seems even a few DKos'ers have lost the thread back to why rightwingers conjured up their claim that the administration lied to cover up the involvement of terrorists.  Republicans couldn't stand to hear the President say "Al Qaeda is on the run."  They have completely polluted the swimming pool with sewage.

    "Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln

    by leftreborn on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 06:29:46 PM PDT

  •  the confusion is all the GOP's doing (0+ / 0-)
    But CNN National Security Contributor Fran Townsend injected a new element into the crucial time line on Friday night, reporting on Anderson Cooper 360 that senior intelligence officials had multiple conversations with senior White House officials in the first 24 hours after the attack.

    Townsend, a former homeland security and counterterrorism adviser to President George W. Bush, added that "we don't know" what was said.

    "But I can tell you from having lived through these crises, you're getting a constant feed of what the intelligence community understands about what is currently going on and what has happened on the ground," Townsend said.

    She added that "they will caveat the information" because in the first hours there "will be all sorts of information, some of it which will turn out not to have been true."

    CNN -- Intelligence on Benghazi shifted after Obama administration described attack as 'spontaneous'

    The article adds that "a senior Republican lawmaker" said that members of Congress had been informed by CIA within 24 hours that the attack was apparently not a spontaneous act in the midst of a protest.
    In late September, DNI spokesman Shawn Turner said: "As we learned more about the attack we revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists."

    This official says in that statement, "deliberate" should be understood to mean the militants had "a willful intent to get over the compound." The official said use of the word "organized" should be interpreted to mean "the people involved in the attack knew each other, they weren't meeting there for the first time."

    CNN -- Officials: CIA memo calling Libya incident 'spontaneous' poor word choice

    From CNN again:
    With regard to the initial thinking that the incident started as a protest – this official maintains that intelligence coming from human sources and intercepts all indicated there was a protest on the scene. They note that there were many across the Middle East at the time as well as confusion in the immediate aftermath of the attack.
    Those "human sources" are witnesses who described several groups converging on the compound firing weapons. Some carried the black flag of Ansar al Sharia, a Salafist militia not well disposed toward the US (unlike many Libyans these days). A cellphone pic of a "leader" of the attack was provided. Some of the participants said that the motivation for the attack was that fucking video. Some of them were unarmed.

    This is the information that was coming back from Benghazi in the immediate aftermath. The survivors likely said only that it seemed like a sudden, coordinated attack. But the reports from witnesses suggested there was a demonstration that had been used as cover.

    The administration's statements all along have been pretty straightforward, at least in revealing the situation as it was then understood.

    All things in the sky are pure to those who have no telescopes. – Charles Fort

    by subtropolis on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 07:02:30 PM PDT

  •  There, there, GOP... sorry, no there, there...;) (0+ / 0-)

    Dudehisattva...

    "Generosity, Ethics, Patience, Effort, Concentration, and Wisdom"

    by Dood Abides on Sun Oct 21, 2012 at 06:12:45 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site