State Dept. says Benghazi was a terror attack. Where’s the rest of the truth?

About two weeks ago, David Kirkpatrick wrote in the New York Times that the Benghazi attack was the result of a spontaneous reaction to an anti-islam video trailer — echoing the debunked Susan Rice talking point (repeated by both President Obama and Hillary Clinton).

Now even the US State Department is saying that’s untrue. According to Catherine Herridge at Fox News,

The State Department on Friday for the first time blamed specific groups and militants for the 2012 Benghazi attack, designating them as terrorists — a move that further undermines initial claims the attack was spontaneous.

The department announced that it was labeling Ansar al-Sharia in Benghazi and Ansar al-Sharia in Darnah as terror organizations, in part over their role in the Benghazi attack.The State Department also labeled as terrorists Sufian bin Qumu, head of the Darnah branch and a former Guantanamo Bay detainee, and Ahmed Abu Khattalah, head of the Benghazi branch.

Khattalah granted interviews after the incident and according to his Guantanamo file, has historic ties to the al-Qaida network, including training at “Usama bin Laden’s Torkham camp.”

Why this sudden change in tune from the State Department? And is it the typical DC beltway two-step to issue a statement on a Friday so it won’t be noticed?

Seems to me this State Department statement completely refutes and makes irrelevant the “report” by David Kirkpatrick — as if it were relevant anyway.

What does the statement actually mean? The new terror designation bars anyone from providing or trying to provide “material support or resources” to those organizations and individuals, and freezes any assets they have in the U.S. The State Department has also announced it is offering a reward of up to $10 million for information leading to the arrest or conviction of anyone involved in the Benghazi attack.

Earlier this week we shared a letter sent to Speaker of the House John Boehner requesting a select committee, with subpoena powers, to specifically investigate Benghazi. I’d hate to see our country more concerned with an off-ramp in New Jersey than the deaths of four Americans.

Something horrific happened in Benghazi that resulted in the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Ty Woods, and Glenn Doherty, and the victims’ families and survivors deserve the truth.

The State Department statement just confirmed this was a terrorist attack. Now we must be vigilant in resolving why Ambassador Stevens was there and why he was placed in the middle of Islamic terrorist territory, without requisite and requested security forces.

23 COMMENTS

  1. of course the terrorist do all that. and the enemy in disguise. working for them. inside of compound. where our Ambassador Stephen stay. find out here too we have in U.S.A the enemy in disguise..

    • Glenn Beck said from the git-go that it was arms related. I really have no clue but I’m sure something shady was going on.

      • I doubt Beck has the truth nailed on this one. I think it was supposed to be an ambassador kidnapped, and eventually a high-value prisoner exchange, all orchestrated by a covert conspiracy with Obama & the State Dept. and Obama’s new best buddies, the Muslim Brotherhood. Unfortunately, a couple Seals weren’t in on it. The stand down order was an attempt to save the operation. Just my theory, but it’s based on things I’ve seen in banana republics and fledgling democracies over 30 years ago.

      • The opposing high-value prisoner being the Blind Sheik, even trade 4 Amb. Stevens. (The ‘Brotherhood has been twisting Brother Obummer’s arm for years over the return of the B. Sheik. But the Seals queered the deal, even after being told repeatedly 2 “Stand down.” Kinda’ looks like “Stand down” meant “Let them have Amb. Stevens and we’ll take it from there. Guns weren’t the issue here. The issue was rewarding the ‘Brotherhood with the return of their revered Blind Sheik. Obummer rewards/supports the ‘Brotherhood at every opportunity. And marches in lock-step with them. What could go wrong w/that arrangement?

  2. I knew this from the beginning, my gut instinct told me these people were sacrificed . I didn’t know why, but the incident was full of unanswered questions and made it highly suspicious.

  3. The main reason we’ve never captured any of the bad actors is under the normal duress of interrogation, the truth would come out, and it’d spatter egg on more faces than you can imagine. I wouldn’t doubt that Biden was given this low-hanging fruit of an operation, and blew it, but everyone else’s fingerprints are on it as well.

  4. And I will continue to say “Remember the Benghazi 4”. We need the truth and then maybe we can make sure that Hillary does not become the first woman President.

  5. 10 million dollars for information all the while sending more than that much in funds and weapons to the very same groups that were involved in the killings, Makes sense to me ……?

  6. Whether or not we’ll ever get the truth….this event is the very epitome of how EVERYTHING in the Obama Administration is being run. My grandfather had a saying. “People who look stupid…..usually are” and this is the Stupidest looking bunch of fools ever to run a government.

  7. First, it was the obama regime doing a Kabuki dance. Now there’s a whole lot of twerking going on -and not from Miley Cyrus. Disgusting!

  8. Rumors have swirled about funneling weapons through Libya to Syrian rebels, but as long as they remain rumor and half truths, this administration can deflect criticism as conspiracy theory. The most transparent administration in history will never be forthright with the truth as it can only lead to Watergate, Iran-Contra, and Lewinski sized problems for the smartest man on earth.

    While I can understand the rationale for funneling guns to the Syrian rebels, the unfortunate part is that this administration seems inept at running a covert operation.

  9. The order to stand down was issued when the plan was enacted. There was not supposed to be any resistance to the planned exchange of the blind sheik for Ambassador Stevens. There was talk of the exchange coming out of DC long before the planned assault. Remember 911? Do you recall the black smoke? A sign of an oxygen starved fire, yet hot enough to melt structural steel (lol). This has covert written all over it.

  10. Coronel, the final paragraph contains the meat of the matter. Stevens was convinced he was a marked man and knew there were security problems. He was not stupid. He would not have gone to Benghazi on the anniversary of 9/11 for a non-urgent meeting that could have been done in Tripoli the week prior or the week after. Who ordered him to be there on that specific day against his presumed better judgment? Who is the next step in his COC?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here