Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

dipsydoodle

(42,239 posts)
Thu Sep 20, 2012, 10:07 AM Sep 2012

New picture emerging of "terrorist attack" in Benghazi

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:21am BST

The U.S. Consulate in Benghazi apparently was not troubled at first by a smattering of protesters on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks last week, but that changed abruptly at 9:35 p.m. when it sent a message that the building was under heavy assault, U.S. government sources said.

New information emerging a week after attackers launched rocket-propelled grenades and mortars and killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens, suggests that the protests at the outset were so small and unthreatening as to attract little notice.

While many questions remain, the latest accounts differ from the initial information provided by the Obama administration, which had suggested that protests in front of the consulate over an anti-Islamic film had played a major role in precipitating the subsequent violent attack.


http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/09/20/uk-usa-libya-consulate-idUKBRE88I1IS20120920

Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/09/20/uk-usa-libya-consulate-idUKBRE88I1IS20120920



Further down the article the claim made that Blackwater had the security contract appears to be contradicted.
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
New picture emerging of "terrorist attack" in Benghazi (Original Post) dipsydoodle Sep 2012 OP
The terrorists saw the opening with the anti-Islam film protests and TOOK it. blm Sep 2012 #1
Yeah.... but... harmonicon Sep 2012 #2
Let me try... UnseenUndergrad Sep 2012 #6
You've covered nothing, because... harmonicon Sep 2012 #9
"Terrorists"? I smell a "loyal Gadhafi-ies" militia... OK, pretty much the same thing. johnfunk Sep 2012 #5
Most fingers point at the jihadis in Ansar al Sharia. Comrade Grumpy Sep 2012 #7
that's my view, too blm Sep 2012 #8
Not Good... liberallibral Sep 2012 #3
Yep. glacierbay Sep 2012 #4

blm

(113,091 posts)
1. The terrorists saw the opening with the anti-Islam film protests and TOOK it.
Thu Sep 20, 2012, 10:31 AM
Sep 2012

They ginned up the violence to do exactly what the film-maker and many RW extremists here want - a prolonged, violent confrontation with the Muslim world - coincides with what Bin Laden wanted, too.

RW extremists are the minority in all these countries want to drag the rest of the world into waging the battles and genocides THEY envision - including the crazies in this country, like those who made that film and publicly post disgusting, incendiary posts on Facebook and YouTube.

harmonicon

(12,008 posts)
2. Yeah.... but...
Thu Sep 20, 2012, 11:18 AM
Sep 2012

if you really think that "RW extremists are the minority in all these countries want to drag the rest of the world into waging the battles and genocides THEY envision" how the hell do you think the "revolution" in Libya started? Do you think it was democracy-loving freedom fighters from Yemen and Saudi Arabia coming in to join them?

If the majority of the Libyan people were on the side of the revolution, why did they need military support from the strongest countries in the world? The US military wasn't needed to help the revolutionaries in Egypt and Tunisia.

As much as it sickens me, we made our own bed in Libya, and now we have to lie in it. It's not as if this is the first shitty foreign policy/military decision made by the US since WWII - it follows the pattern of usually making a terrible decision. Time after time, for over 60 years now, we've based policy on "the enemy of our enemy is our friend" and I can't think of a single time when that's been the case.

UnseenUndergrad

(249 posts)
6. Let me try...
Thu Sep 20, 2012, 02:16 PM
Sep 2012
If the majority of the Libyan people were on the side of the revolution, why did they need military support from the strongest countries in the world? The US military wasn't needed to help the revolutionaries in Egypt and Tunisia.


Let's see: heap big weaponry that he bought while playing nicey-nice with Europe and the US, existing weaponry from the former Soviet sphere along with mercenaries and techs from same, Sahelian and Sub-Saharan mercenaries loosely connecting to his support of the African Union (and the source of most of the racist backlash immediately post war), A state apparatus controlled through fear and patronage and Russia and China remaining on the fence for the longest time.

I hope I've covered most of it.

harmonicon

(12,008 posts)
9. You've covered nothing, because...
Thu Sep 20, 2012, 08:58 PM
Sep 2012

people are needed to operate those weapons. The police and the militaries of Egypt and Tunisia were more-or-less on the side of the revolutionaries. For the most part, this was not the case in Libya. There were a great number of Libyans fighting for the country they had and loved.

As for mercenaries, there were plenty on the side of the revolutionaries from Saudia Arabia, Yemen, etc.

Libya is also the only country of those three where blacks were murdered because of their race and dumbed in mass graves or simply left to rot.

We fucked up in Libya. Just how bad is now becoming more clear.

johnfunk

(6,113 posts)
5. "Terrorists"? I smell a "loyal Gadhafi-ies" militia... OK, pretty much the same thing.
Thu Sep 20, 2012, 12:04 PM
Sep 2012

And I know I'm not alone in my suspicions.

 

Comrade Grumpy

(13,184 posts)
7. Most fingers point at the jihadis in Ansar al Sharia.
Thu Sep 20, 2012, 02:44 PM
Sep 2012

Although the Libyan government wishes it was Gaddafi loyalists.

 

liberallibral

(272 posts)
3. Not Good...
Thu Sep 20, 2012, 11:43 AM
Sep 2012

The President's Administration, and especially Susan Rice were adamant about the attacks being due solely to the video...

Now they have to back-track...

Awful! Romney is a complete buffoon, and keeps giving us the gift of GAFFES that keep on giving - and we can't seem to put him away..... Very annoying and scary!!!

 

glacierbay

(2,477 posts)
4. Yep.
Thu Sep 20, 2012, 12:01 PM
Sep 2012

I've been saying this from the first time I saw Susan Rice on Sun. adamantly insisting that this was a spontaneous attack, and not a pre-planned attack. I was shaking my head thinking does she honestly think that the vast majority of americans, or the world for that matter, believe that?
I truly hope this doesn't bite the Admin. in the ass too hard.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»New picture emerging of &...