# What's the "final" word on the Benghazi embassy attack? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 31, 2012, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384 "2012-10-31T00:39:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/81 "2012-11-04T22:29:38Z")
> [@bbonden](#): > > That was October 1, ten days before the hearing. > > As for the documents, it truly sucks if the documents contained information that it is against US interests to publish. But that’s the way an open government works. Per the cite, the documents posted were “sensitive but unclassified,” and there is no allegation - even anonymously - that Issa acted contrary to the designation. If documents require treatment in excess of their designation, it is up to the providing department or party (State for some of the documents mentioned, unnamed sources for others) to redact or otherwise explain the sensitivity, as appropriate. > > I’m happy to consider other disclosures as inappropriate. But all Dana Milbank managed to show is that he is not a security writer - and that he doesn’t read the New York Times. No, government should not work on releasing the names of the ones in Libya helping the CIA. AFAIK,\*\* the New York times never revealed that specific information\*\*, and that was one of the big reasons why many have condemned what the Republicans did with that release of data. As a blogger put it: > **[Issa Benghazi Document Dump Reveals Name of Libyan Woman Activist Working...](http://angryblackladychronicles.com/2012/10/19/issa-benghazi-document-dump-reveals-name-of-libyan-woman-activist-working-with-u-s/)** > [@](#): > > But this afternoon, Darrell Issa — in a stroke of sheer idiocy — published reams of State Department documents, and this woman’s name appears in the documents — unredacted. > > And now her life is in danger. The lives of several other Libyans named in the documents are in danger. And House Republicans, specifically Darrell Issa and Jason Chaffetz, are to blame: [http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/10/19/issa\_s\_benghazi\_document\_dump\_exposes\_several\_libyans\_working\_with\_the\_us](http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/10/19/issa_s_benghazi_document_dump_exposes_several_libyans_working_with_the_us) > [@](#): > > House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) compromised the identities of several Libyans working with the U.S. government and placed their lives in danger when he released reams of State Department communications Friday, according to Obama administration officials. > > Issa posted 166 pages of sensitive but unclassified State Department communications related to Libya on the committee’s website afternoon as part of his effort to investigate security failures and expose contradictions in the administration’s statements regarding the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi that resulted in the death of Amb. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. > > “The American people deserve nothing less than a full explanation from this administration about these events, including why the repeated warnings about a worsening security situation appear to have been ignored by this administration. Americans also deserve a complete explanation about your administration’s decision to accelerate a normalized presence in Libya at what now appears to be at the cost of endangering American lives,” Issa and Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) wrote today in a letter to President Barack Obama. > > But Issa didn’t bother to retract the names of Libyan civilians and local leaders mentioned in the cables, and just as with the WikiLeaks dump of State Department cables last year, the administration says that Issa has done damage to U.S. efforts to work with those Libyans and exposed them to physical danger from the very groups that had an interest in attacking the U.S. consulate. ---
**Author:** ![bbonden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecb155/32.png) [@bbonden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bbonden)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/82 "2012-11-04T22:46:21Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > This is the first time you’ve alleged that it might just be incompetence and not some sort of conspiratorial cover up. You’ve completely backpedaled on it. I’ve labeled the event incompetence from the first. How can anyone think otherwise? Anyway, I’ve not backtracked. Here is an excerpt from my first post in the thread - #3: > [@](#): > > It’s crystal clear that there is either cover-up or gross incompetence in the post-event narrative (most likely: cover-up of gross incompetence). As for the video, you say: > [@BigT](#): > > We were told that the embassy was attacked because of a video. This is wrong. We were not told that the embassy was attacked by the video. We were told that there were two groups, one gathering for a peaceful protest and a second group or groups (“individual clusters”) of “extremists” who “hijacked” the peaceful assembly: > [@](#): > > But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous – not a premeditated – response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated. > > We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to – or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in – in the wake of the revolution in Libya are – are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there. [http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-us-ambassador-united-nations-susan-rice/story?id=17240933](http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-us-ambassador-united-nations-susan-rice/story?id=17240933) That’s Susan Rice, in one of her five TV appearances on September 16, and it is wrong in almost all particulars. There was no demonstration, and there were not “individual clusters of extremists”; there was a company-sized, coordinated, mixed-arms multi-prong surprise assault. Moreover, nothing was “hijacked”; the attack was the plan from the first. > [@BigT](#): > > The entire concept of a coverup requires the video story to be a lie. No. The US diplomatic mission was under full-scale, coordinated military assault from jihadis. The grievance cited by the attackers after the fact has, at most, passing relevance to the appropriate US response in protecting American interests and lives. The “protest” lines were trotted out to dampen charges that the attack was premeditated (which it plainly was) and the response feeble (ditto). ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/83 "2012-11-04T22:55:22Z")
> [@bbonden](#): > > The “protest” lines were trotted out to dampen charges that the attack was premeditated (which it plainly was) and the response feeble (ditto). Why is that an affirmation of something that was found later called “charges”? Incidentally Susan Rice has pointed out that she based those early say so’s on what the intelligence community told her then, she has acknowledged that later information, I’m beginning to think that we have here just another problem with problems with the right acknowledging the march of time or timelines. ---
**Author:** ![bbonden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecb155/32.png) [@bbonden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bbonden)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/84 "2012-11-04T22:56:03Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > No, government should not work on releasing the names of the ones in Libya helping the CIA. Agreed. But that’s not what the linked pieces say. The individuals in documents cited are listed as talking to State, not the CIA. Further, it is in the first instance the responsibility of the agency or department that is delivering documents to Congress to be sure that the documents are appropriately designated (classifed, SBU, top secret, etc.), properly redacted and properly explained to the Committee. If there is an indication that Issa or Chaffetz or whomever acted contrary to a document’s appropriate designation, I agree - string 'em up (metaphorically). But someone needs to actually cite something that says that happened. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/85 "2012-11-04T23:01:06Z")
> [@bbonden](#): > > Agreed. > > But that’s not what the linked pieces say. The individuals in documents cited are listed as talking to State, not the CIA. Further, it is in the first instance the responsibility of the agency or department that is delivering documents to Congress to be sure that the documents are appropriately designated (classifed, SBU, top secret, etc.), properly redacted and properly explained to the Committee. That would not had been a problem, if the documents had not been released after it was supposed to have been seen just by the representatives. > [@bbonden](#): > > If there is an indication that Issa or Chaffetz or whomever acted contrary to a document’s appropriate designation, I agree - string 'em up (metaphorically). But someone needs to actually cite something that says that happened. Once again, you are missing the biggest irresponsibility, I do not think the secret organizations expected congresscritters to \*\*dump \*\*all the information given to them. ---
**Author:** ![bbonden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecb155/32.png) [@bbonden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bbonden)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/86 "2012-11-04T23:03:57Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Why is that an affirmation of something that was found later called “charges”? > > Incidentally Susan Rice has pointed out that she based those early say so’s on what the intelligence community told her then, she has acknowledged that later information, I’m beginning to think that we have here just another problem with problems with the right acknowledging the march of time or timelines. I’m not sure that I follow. It is clear that there was a cock-up of the highest order and that the cock-up (or cock-ups) ended in tragedy. It also is clear that in the eight weeks since the attack, State, DoD and CIA have each selectively distributed documents and memes that point, sometimes subtly, to one of the other two entities as responsible for the cock-up. And we agree, I think, that the place to start the inquiry is the CIA’s September 15 talking points that were prepared in advance of Ambassador Rice’s media blitz. ---
**Author:** ![bbonden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecb155/32.png) [@bbonden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bbonden)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/87 "2012-11-04T23:11:26Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > That would not had been a problem, if the documents had not been released after it was supposed to have been seen just by the representatives. Documents that are “supposed to have been seen just by the representatives” are so indicated in their designation. I’ve flipped through the documents at the link - most are reports of local security activity. And every one that I saw was marked as SBU. Some - appropriately - had redactions. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/88 "2012-11-04T23:15:03Z")
> [@bbonden](#): > > Documents that are “supposed to have been seen just by the representatives” are so indicated in their designation. I’ve flipped through the documents at the link - most are reports of local security activity. And every one that I saw was marked as SBU. Some - appropriately - had redactions. Not clear why you bring this up, are we to deduce that then there is even more reasons why it was unjustified to make that dump with no thought on the designations? Still, releasing names is something that I do not see as “needed” in a case like this one. Otherwise then we should had seen names with those NYT reports. ---
**Author:** ![bbonden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecb155/32.png) [@bbonden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bbonden)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/89 "2012-11-04T23:23:15Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Not clear why you bring this up, are we to deduce that then there is even more reasons why it was unjustified to make that dump with no thought on the designations? Still, releasing names is something that I do not see as “needed” in a case like this one. Otherwise then we should had seen names with those NYT reports. You’ve got it backwards. Every document that I saw at the link was unclassified (SBU is “sensitive but unclassified”). Some were redacted. None was designated confidential or higher. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/90 "2012-11-04T23:29:49Z")
> [@bbonden](#): > > You’ve got it backwards. Every document that I saw at the link was unclassified (SBU is “sensitive but unclassified”). Some were redacted. > > None was designated confidential or higher. Oh, so then it is peachy to dump all of it… Just because you can it does not mean that you should. And we are talking about organizations that were incompetent in some areas, that does not justify even more incompetency from the politicians, specially that after Plame one just does not need more reminders of who are the groups that like to spill identities for political gain. ---
**Author:** ![bbonden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecb155/32.png) [@bbonden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bbonden)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/91 "2012-11-04T23:34:35Z")
> [@Jophiel](#): > > So “Everyone knew it so it doesn’t count!” (exactly as I predicted) and “Gee, sucks to be them but oh well”? > > Like I said, I’ m sure Al’Qaeda is hiring if the GOP wants a place to give away more information on US security in their witch hunt to stop Obama from being re-elected. If you identify “information on US security” that “the GOP” has “give[n] away,” I’ll second your condemnation. You haven’t. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/92 "2012-11-04T23:39:37Z")
> [@bbonden](#): > > If you identify “information on US security” that “the GOP” has “give[n] away,” I’ll second your condemnation. You haven’t. Pardon me, but your slip is showing. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/93 "2012-11-04T23:47:48Z")
> [@bbonden](#): > > You’ve got it backwards. Every document that I saw at the link was unclassified (SBU is “sensitive but unclassified”). Some were redacted. > > None was designated confidential or higher. There is one thing that I’m curious though, besides ignoring common sense on that dump of data, IIUC there is a usually a difference with “_sensitive_” and “_non-sensitive, for public release_”, were the documents marked as in the latest? ---
**Author:** ![Raintitan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e99b99/32.png) [@Raintitan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raintitan)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/94 "2012-11-05T00:01:40Z")
“We were not told that the embassy was attacked by the video.” People don’t seem to be getting the very basic point that…IT WAS NOT THE EMBASSY. When people are operating in or visiting a building for CIA operatives who are assisting in civil war like activities in a fragmented and dangerous third world country things can go wrong very quickly. I don’t see what is shocking about this and why Fox News is making this into something it isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/95 "2012-11-05T00:21:16Z")
> [@Raintitan](#): > > I don’t see […] why Fox News is making this into something it isn’t. I assume this was a joke. ---
**Author:** ![babygoat666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2acd7d/32.png) [@babygoat666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/babygoat666)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/96 "2012-11-05T00:49:00Z")
> [@Jophiel](#): > > I assume this was a joke. Yes, Fox News is a joke. ---
**Author:** ![bbonden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecb155/32.png) [@bbonden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bbonden)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/97 "2012-11-05T01:16:34Z")
> [@Raintitan](#): > > People don’t seem to be getting the very basic point that…IT WAS NOT THE EMBASSY. True enough. There are three different locations being discussed: (1) the embassy in Tripoli (not under attack), (2) the flagged US consulate in Benghazi (attacked, burned, two US fatalities), (3) the unmarked “CIA annex.” > [@Raintitan](#): > > When people are operating in or visiting a building for CIA operatives who are assisting in civil war like activities in a fragmented and dangerous third world country things can go wrong very quickly. Eh, we are talking about an armed assault on a flagged diplomatic mission and the murder of the ambassador. That’s . . . rare. Now, there is lots of speculation about why Stevens happened to be in Benghazi, meeting Turkish diplomats, that evening - and a lot of it is directly related to “civil war like activities.” But that’s speculation, and it is not clear why it would lead to less security, rather than more. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/98 "2012-11-05T01:24:27Z")
I think every ambassador should go around the country with a fully armed platoon at all times. No wait. That would be stupid. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/99 "2012-11-05T01:36:44Z")
> [@bbonden](#): > > True enough. There are three different locations being discussed: (1) the embassy in Tripoli (not under attack), (2) the flagged US consulate in Benghazi (attacked, burned, two US fatalities), (3) the unmarked “CIA annex.” > > Eh, we are talking about an armed assault on a flagged diplomatic mission and the murder of the ambassador. That’s . . . rare. > > Now, there is lots of speculation about why Stevens happened to be in Benghazi, meeting Turkish diplomats, that evening - and a lot of it is directly related to “civil war like activities.” But that’s speculation, and it is not clear why it would lead to less security, rather than more. Lots of baseless speculation that is. It is more likely that Stevens was more keen to be among the people of Libya than just staying under a security apparatus that would keep him away from the Libyans. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/anne-applebaum-ambassador-stevenss-death-shouldnt-create-bunker-mentality/2012/10/17/c0cc853e-1876-11e2-9855-71f2b202721b\_story.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/anne-applebaum-ambassador-stevenss-death-shouldnt-create-bunker-mentality/2012/10/17/c0cc853e-1876-11e2-9855-71f2b202721b_story.html) > [@](#): > > To my mind, there is only one truly disturbing element of this discussion: the underlying assumptions — made by almost everyone participating in the argument — that no American diplomats should ever be exposed to any risk whatsoever and that it is always better to have too much security than too little. > > Since Ambassador Chris Stevens’s death, it’s become widely known that he did not subscribe to those assumptions. He was a popular, admired and successful ambassador precisely because he traveled around the country where he was posted, got out of his residence, spoke Arabic and understood the value of public diplomacy. He was in Benghazi on Sept. 11 to open a new cultural center where Libyans could get access to books and movies about America, something he clearly thought was important. > > All of this made him extremely unusual in a region where many American diplomats spend most of their time behind the guarded doors of bunker-like embassies, often far from the center of town. The U.S. Embassy in Tunis looks like a high-security prison. The U.S. Embassy in Amman is encircled by barriers of concrete and steel. Even in London, the U.S. Embassy is surrounded by so many impractical roadblocks that neighbors have protested and the Americans have decided to move. When the construction is completed, the ambassador will commute from his residence in central London to the embassy in a distant suburb, far away from the events and people he is supposed to monitor. ---
**Author:** ![bbonden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecb155/32.png) [@bbonden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bbonden)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384/100 "2012-11-05T01:39:25Z")
Up-thread, I queried where the AC-130s that were on-station in Libya in April were in theater on September 11. Today, the DoD allowed the NYT to report that there were no AC-130s on station - and, in fact, that there were literally no available assets anywhere in the Mediterranean in a position to respond to an incident in Libya or elsewhere in the Arab Spring countries on that day. So, the DoD now has given three different stories for its non-response: 1. Not enough information [http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/26/panetta-on-benghazi-attack-could-not-put-forces-at-risk/](http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/26/panetta-on-benghazi-attack-could-not-put-forces-at-risk/) (already linked above) 2. State never asked [http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/01/new-details-on-benghazi.html](http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/01/new-details-on-benghazi.html) (already linked above) 3. No available assets [http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/world/africa/benghazi-attack-raises-doubts-about-us-abilities-in-region.html?pagewanted=1&\_r=0&ref=world](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/world/africa/benghazi-attack-raises-doubts-about-us-abilities-in-region.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0&ref=world) It’s an interesting game of inter-agency musical chairs. As for the latest, how is it possible that the US failed to position assets in a manner that they could be deployed to the Arab Spring nations? How was it that there were no assets in place on September 11, of all days? And especially, even if poor planning left all assets elsewhere in the world on the morning of September 11, why was there no heightened alert after the US embassy in Cairo was breached, and the US flag removed, hours before anything happened in Benghazi? Shouldn’t that have at least led to the positioning of a team in-theater, in case the protest in Cairo was “hijacked”? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-final-word-on-the-benghazi-embassy-attack/639384.md?page=6)