General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDebunking Jim Jordan's narrative about Clinton's Youtube video statement.
This took me all of 15 minutes to do...
http://www.state.gov/secretary/20092013clinton/rm/2012/09/197654.htm
Those are excerpts from Secretary Clinton's statement the day after the attack.
So why did she say "some have sought to justify it because of the video". Well, if Jim Jordan would've shut his mouth for a minute and actually listened yesterday... this is what she was trying to get through his thick skull...
Initial intelligence suggest that Ansar al-Shariah was the group behind the attack...
The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/24/us-usa-benghazi-emails-idUSBRE89N02C20121024
Also, witnesses to the attack itself claimed Ansar al-Shariah was behind it....
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/world/middleeast/attack-by-fringe-group-highlights-the-problem-of-libya-militias.html?_r=3&hp&pagewanted=all
Witnesses also claimed that they saw the leader of Ansar al Shariah
Witnesses at the scene of the attack on the American Mission in Benghazi have said they saw Mr. Abu Khattala leading the assault, and his personal involvement is the latest link between the attack and his brigade, Ansar al-Shariah, a puritanical militant group that wants to advance Islamic law in Libya.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/world/africa/libya-singles-out-islamist-as-a-commander-in-benghazi-consulate-attack.html
THEN, this is where the video comes in. Ansar Al Shariah issued a vague, sort of denial as being the group behind the attack and THEY themselves said it was a spontaneous uprising over the youtube video.
Ansar al-Shariah Brigade didnt participate in this popular uprising as a separate entity, but it was carrying out its duties in al-Jalaa hospital and other places where it was entrusted with some duties. The Brigade didnt participate as a sole entity; rather, it was a spontaneous popular uprising in response to what happened by the West.
Ansar al Shariah wants you to believe that this attack was part of a spontaneous popular uprising, and not an assault linked to an organized Jihadi-Salafist group that has launched attacks in Benghazi in the recent past, including against at least one foreign consulate. To believe that, you also have to believe that a group of demonstrators, armed with assault rifles and rocket-propelled grenades, spontaneously showed up in front of the US Consulate, and then overran the security and killed the US ambassador and three Americans. While this is certainly possible, it isnt likely.
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2012/09/ansar_al_shariah_issues_statem.php
Also, it should be important to note that the leader of Ansar has been arrested and charged with playing a significant role in the attack.
He is the first person known to be charged in connection with the attack, though officials say other charges have also been filed.
He has been described as the founder of Ansar al-Sharia, a Libyan extremist group. Investigators have said for months that they believe he was at the U.S. consulate during the attack.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/us-charges-libyan-role-deadly-attack-benghazi-consulate-f6C10861451
So, getting back to the statement that Jordan was picking at...
"Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our Embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the internet"
That statement is 100% true. Ansar al Shariah did in fact seek to justify the attack because of the stupid YouTube video. We've arrested and charged their #1 and he will face trial in the US soon.
Again, this is the kind of stuff that always happens right after an incident such as this. Anyone who is a reasonable person understands the concept of the "fog of war" and should assume that a lot of theories and stories are going to be put out there before all the facts are really known. But the whole thing that Clinton said in her statement about the video were relevant and true.
DURHAM D
(32,606 posts)Has anyone figured out who was in that picture (two men) that one of the congressman showed Hillary yesterday? I think it was Cong. Pompass that waved the pic.
emulatorloo
(44,071 posts)or state dept representative within the Benghazi compound.
Hard not to assume the photo was fabricated and/or the people in the photo aren't who he said they were and/or it was not taken when and where he said it was.
No luck with a Google search.
spanone
(135,795 posts)emulatorloo
(44,071 posts)She said "some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet" which is a true statement.
Jordan's version was to pretend she said something completely different.
He suffers from a willful lack of reading comprehension.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)was that he seemed to want to parse words and yet didn't seem to have the fundamental understanding of the words implications that he was trying to parse. He did the same thing in later rounds of questioning (I can't remember the word he picked on then--every time he came up, I left the room).
emulatorloo
(44,071 posts)Huge fail on his part. HRC never said what he claimed he said, she did well pointing that out.