January 10, 2014

State Department Lists Benghazi Attackers as "Terrorists", Nullifying Earlier Stance that the Attack was Caused by 1st Ammendment Expression

Now that the State Department has officially listed some of those involved in the attack which killed Ambassador Stevens, does that mean that it is now the White House's official stance that the attack was the work of terrorists? And if so, are they now going to apologize for the way in which they misled the American public?

Don't. Hold. Your. Breath:

The Department of State has announced the designations of Ansar al-Shari’a in Benghazi, Ansar al-Shari’a in Darnah, and Ansar al-Shari’a in Tunisia as separate Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) under Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act and as Specially Designated Global Terrorist entities under section 1(b) of Executive Order (E.O.) 13224. In addition to these group designations, the Department of State has also designated Ahmed Abu Khattalah, Sufian bin Qumu, and Seifallah Ben Hassine, commonly known as “Abou Iyadh,” as Specially Designated Global Terrorists under E.O. 13224. The consequences of the FTO and E.O. 13224 designations include a prohibition against knowingly providing, or attempting or conspiring to provide, material support or resources to, or engaging in transactions with these organizations, and the freezing of all property and interests in property of the organization and individuals that are in the United States, or come within the United States or the control of U.S. persons. The Department of State took these actions in consultation with the Departments of Justice and Treasury.

Created separately after the fall of the Qadhafi regime, Ansar al-Shari’a in Benghazi and Ansar al-Shari’a in Darnah have been involved in terrorist attacks against civilian targets, frequent assassinations, and attempted assassinations of security officials and political actors in eastern Libya, and the September 11, 2012 attacks against the U.S. Special Mission and Annex in Benghazi, Libya. Members of both organizations continue to pose a threat to U.S. interests in Libya. Ahmed Abu Khattalah is a senior leader of Ansar al-Shari’a in Benghazi and Sufian bin Qumu is the leader of Ansar al-Shari’a in Darnah.

Founded by Seifallah Ben Hassine in early 2011, Ansar al-Shari’a in Tunisia was involved in the September 14, 2012 attack against the U.S. Embassy and American school in Tunis, which put the lives of over one hundred United States employees in the Embassy at risk. The Tunisian government has declared Ansar al-Shari’a in Tunisia a terrorist organization, and the group has been implicated in attacks against Tunisian security forces, assassinations of Tunisian political figures, and attempted suicide bombings of locations that tourists frequent. Ansar al-Shari’a in Tunisia, which is ideologically aligned with al-Qa’ida and tied to its affiliates, including AQIM, represents the greatest threat to U.S. interests in Tunisia.

The U.S. Government is committed to taking all appropriate actions against the organizations and individuals responsible for the attacks against the U.S. diplomatic facilities in Libya and Tunisia. We remain committed to working with the Libyan government to bring the perpetrators of the September 11, 2012, Benghazi attacks to justice and to ensure the safety of our personnel serving overseas. Likewise, we continue to urge the Tunisian government to bring to justice those responsible for the September 14, 2012 attack on the U.S. Embassy in Tunis.

Today, the Department of State updated its Rewards for Justice website (www.rewardsforjustice.net) to include a reward of up to $10 million for information leading to the arrest or conviction of any individual responsible for the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks.

Expect a full fledged Sunday New York Times article this weekend "debunking" the myth that terrorists were involved in the Benghazi attack. If you read the earlier Times piece, it was really a semantics argument about what "al Qaeda" means. As if it was just as misleading for some Republicans to claim that it was al Qaeda that was behind the attack as it was for the administration to claim that the attack wasn't the work of terrorists.

Except that the White House intentionally misled the public, while those claiming that it was al Qaeda are only wrong in the most literal academic sense. Okay, so it wasn't al Qaeda proper. Instead, it was a local Salaafi Islamist group staffed and led by former members of al Qaeda and who have the same goals and methods as al Qaeda.

So, yes Poindexter, you are correct: it wasn't "al Qaeda". It was "Ansar al-Shariah". Thank you for the lesson on organizational boundaries.

But trying to equivocate outright lies by Obama and Hillary Clinton in an attempt to spin a narrative which would be helpful politically in an election year with simple semantic mistakes is meaningful only in the most academic sense, and is itself misleading. And since I'm pretty sure that the ediorial staff at the NYTimes is fairly educated then I can only surmise that their obfuscation is intentional.

Yeah, it's not news that the NYTimes is a partisan rag. But it's a sophistaced partisan rag, so that's okay then.

Thanks to Laura.

By Rusty Shackleford, Ph.D. at 11:58 AM | Comments |