Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JustRalph
|
here is what the e-mails say, from your Reuters link.
First e-mail received at 4:05PM Washington time.
[QUOTE]The text said the State Department's regional security office had reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was "under attack. Embassy in Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well."
The message continued: "Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four ... personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support."
Second E-mail was received at 4:54.
Quote:
|
A second email, headed "Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi" and timed 4:54 p.m. Washington time, said that the Embassy in Tripoli had reported that "the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi had stopped and the compound had been cleared." It said a "response team" was at the site attempting to locate missing personnel.
|
Third e-mail at 6:07:
Quote:
A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: "Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack."
The message reported: "Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli."
|
I know you think this is some kind of amazing smoking gun. Point out to me where it says in any of the e-mails that there was no concurrent demonstration taking place. It says Ansar al Sharia claims responsibility, but these groups claim responsibility all the time for events they have no connection to. Even if they were responsible that does not mean a demonstration was not taking place. Yes, we know now that there was not, but these messages were meant to give a concise account of the situation, Also the e-mails came to the White House from the State Departments regional security office which was receiving information from the Embassy in Tripoli. Tripoli was getting information from Benghazi.
So what is your point here. That Obama knew there was no demonstration? These e mails don't mention a demonstration but neither do they say there was not one.
That Obama did not act quickly enough to defend the compound in Benghazi once he knew of the attack? In the first place you do not know what actions he took or what options were available to him at the time. And the first e mail stated that the ambassador and his party were in the "compound safe haven"
It also stated that, The 17th of February militia is providing security support."
All in all a whole lot of nothing.
