A classified cable reviewed by Fox News describes a classified cable of an “emergency meeting” at the U.S. mission in Benghazi shortly before the 9/11 attack. The State Department’s senior security officer said that he did not believe the consulate could be protected.
The administration has repeatedly claimed that there was no warning prior to the 9/11 attack in Benghazi. While that always did fly in the face of reason, it now dies on the news of this cable.
Ambassador Stevens and the people in the consulate begged for help. They said al-Qaida was in Benghazi and they were going to be the next victims. The State Department did nothing other than reduce security.
Which is worse – leaving the people in the consulate unprotected in an area taken over by al-Qaida or leaving our men to die during a terror attack?
via Fox News
…The U.S. Mission in Benghazi convened an “emergency meeting” less than a month before the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, because Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a “coordinated attack,” according to a classified cable reviewed by Fox News.
Summarizing an Aug. 15 emergency meeting convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Aug. 16 cable marked “SECRET” said that the State Department’s senior security officer, also known as the RSO, did not believe the consulate could be protected.
“RSO (Regional Security Officer) expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound,” the cable said.
According to a review of the cable addressed to the Office of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Emergency Action Committee was also briefed “on the location of approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps within Benghazi … these groups ran the spectrum from Islamist militias, such as the QRF Brigade and Ansar al-Sharia, to ‘Takfirist thugs.’” Each U.S. mission has a so-called Emergency Action Committee that is responsible for security measures and emergency planning…
Ironically, on October 19th, that journalistic disgrace, the LATimes, said this:
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.
Even more ironic, the administration is now claiming they called it terror all along.
President Obama always frames his responses so that he has plausible deniability. His speech in the Rose Garden on the day after the attack referred to terror in a general way. The next day, the President barely mentioned the word “terror” in a speech. After that, everything coming from the administration was that the Benghazi attack was the result of an out-of-control protest.
Now the administration is focusing on the two mentions of the word “terror.” They are trying to say it shows they were honest and transparent all along. They merely made some mistakes.
It is no longer about the truth for them, it is about protecting President Obama and the ideology. All that should matter is the memory of these four dead people and the injured people who fled the mission in Benghazi. They need to be honored with the truth as Catherine Herridge so aptly said.