Libyan witnesses recount organized Benghazi attack

Oct 27, 2012: Associated Press reporters filed a report from Libya that completely smashes the White House’s lame excuses about a protest gone bad.

The AP reporters say they interviewed five witnesses: one of the embassy guards, several people living next door to the consulate compound who were present when the militants first moved in and a lawyer who passed by the scene as he was headed to his nearby home.

According to these witnesses:

  • The attack on our Benghazi consulate began around nightfall with around 150 bearded gunmen sealing off the streets leading to the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.
  • There was no sign of a spontaneous protest against an American-made movie denigrating Islam’s Prophet Muhammad, but the militants did gather around 20 youths in the area to chant against the film.
  • An hour or so later, the heavily armed militants blasted their way into the compound.
  • The trucks the attackers used to block off streets were marked with the logo of Ansar al-Shariah.

Ansar al-Sharia is one of the many powerful, heavily armed militias that operate freely in Libya. The group has an ideology similar to that of al-Qaeda, but it is not clear whether al-Qaeda’s branch in North Africa (AQIM) was involved in the assault.

Reporting international news is AP’s bailiwick.

  • On September 11, an American consulate in a red-hot Muslim region of the world is invaded by heavily armed men.
  • For the first time in 30 years, an American ambassador is murdered.
  • Our diplomatic compounds are U.S. soil, which makes this a direct, murderous assault on the United States of America.
  • The attack occurs on the anniversary of 9/11, the biggest attack on America by Muslim extremists.

AP filed this eyes-on-the-ground report October 27, forty-six days after the event. It says,

“The past week, the AP has gathered accounts from five witnesses.”

In other words, the Associated Press did NOT get around to interviewing eye witnesses of this world-class news event for SIX FULL WEEKS after it happened.

SIX weeks?

Six WEEKS!!

If you go and read the article itself (URL below), you’ll also see a lot of whining about how confusing it all was and where AP reports got some of it right and blahdiblah about those terrible Republicans who politicize stuff during an election year.

Whine. Whine. Cripes, they sound like Democrats. Oh wait. They are Democrats … Democrats who have seen not Chris Stevens’ blood on the wall, but their own.

Don’t expect to see me weeping big ol’ crocodile tears about these undeclared Obama PACs going DOWN. They so deserve it, the scumbags.

Source:

Oct. 27, 2012: Libyan witnesses recount organized Benghazi attack

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-witnesses-recount-organized-benghazi-attack

1 Comment

Filed under Benghazi, Chris Stevens, Democrats, Islam, Libya, Media Bias, Terrorism

One response to “Libyan witnesses recount organized Benghazi attack

  1. there were plenty of reports immediately afterwards but you had to read them at the DailyMirror, the Guardian or the Telegraph… just not on USA sites.

    There is one that stuck in my mind, a man who is a former LFG (anti Gadhafi with other tendencies) who is now working in London for a think tank. He should know, because he was involved with AQ at some point in time, and he stated that it was an Al Qaeda operation because of the Modis Operandi.

    Thinking back to the attacks in Saudi Arabia, he is exactly right, because of the way that they breach the wall to get to where they want and how they then spread mayhem.

    They also had other witness reports such as the commander of the 17th February Brigade who was in hospital because he had been injured in the firefight. He is the one who stated that 10 Libyans were dead and several others wounded. I assume that this was in the firefight at the annex.

    Next, from the LA Times of all places, I saw another witness statement. The two guards who were the ones on duty were sent to Tripoli to talk to the FBI. They were very unhappy about the questioning. These two stated that they had no real weapons and they headed to the roof of the guardhouse. They forgot to take extra clips and then discovered that there were too many insurgents for them to try anything. They probably did the right thing by just getting out of the way.

    This is why I doubt the other witness report where there is a claim that a guard was beaten. I do not think that happened. The person was not one of the two who fled to the roof.

    Like