New
evidence suggests Libya attack not linked to al-Qaeda
After
five weeks of investigation no evidence has been found that the
attack on the US consulate in Libya was premeditated or linked to
al-Qaeda, several US intelligence officials said while speaking on
condition of anonymity.
RT,
20
October, 2012
The
intelligence officials said the Sept. 11 attack that killed US
Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens was most likely an opportunistic
assault, rather than a prearranged operation, the Los Angeles Times
reported.
After
witnessing the violent reaction in Cairo to the controversial YouTube
video “Innocence of Muslims”, the Libyan attackers reportedly
decided to do damage to the nearby Benghazi US Embassy.
The
attack was “carried out following a minimum amount of planning,”
an official said. “The attackers exhibited a high degree of
disorganization. Some joined the attack in progress, some did not
have weapons and others just seemed interested in looting.”
President
Barack Obama has been criticized for not calling the attack an act of
terrorism soon enough. Opponents accused the president of holding
back from that statement because a terrorist attack so soon before
the election could harm his campaign.
Republicans
emphasized the attack as the work of al-Qaeda and accused the Obama
administration for security failures and trying to cover up the
reason behind the assault.
The
president, who initially called the attack a spontaneous reaction to
the YouTube video, eventually changed his statement and called it an
act of terror.
But
five weeks after the investigation, it seems doubtful that al-Qaeda
had any involvement in the offensive.
“There
isn’t any intelligence that the attackers pre-planned their assault
days or weeks in advance,” a second US official told the LA Times.
“The
attackers launched their assault opportunistically after they learned
about the violence at the US Embassy in Cairo,” he added.
A
Libyan off-duty police sergeant who came to the scene of the attack
said militants pulled their guns on him and told him that “the
Americans were abusing our prophet.”
Other
witnesses described a scene in which the attackers appeared to be
civilians carrying weapons, as well as experienced fighters. The
latest evidence points towards a violent reaction towards the
anti-Islam video, while intelligence officials have been unable to
find any connections with al-Qaeda, according to the LA Times.
The
Obama administration has come under scrutiny for changing its stance
on the reason behind the deadly assault. House Homeland Security
Committee chairman, Peter King, released a letter to Obama Saturday
urging the president to release the intelligence community reporting
which led him to describe the attack as a spontaneous reaction to the
film, as well as the information that led him to describe it as an
act of terror.
King
has requested intelligence agency transcripts, State Department radio
traffic, emails, cables, instant messages, situation reports,
intercepts and images that may have helped intelligence officials
make conclusions about the situation.
The
president has denied there was any confusion about the situation, but
with new intelligence information that directly contradicts the
second claim made by the Obama administration, the public appears to
be more confused than ever.
The
Sept. 11 attack on the US consulate in Libya left four Americans dead
and marked the first time a US ambassador was killed in the line of
duty since 1979.
Attackers in Benghazi used rocket-propelled
grenades, hand grenades, anti-aircraft weapons and assault rifles to
engage in a five-hour gun battle in the diplomatic compound. The
attack coincided with protests and attacks throughout the Arab world
that came in response to the anti-Muslim YouTube video. Intelligence
officials are still investigating the cause of the attack.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.