Early State Department Emails Contradict White House Position on Benghazi Attack

Fox News has publishrd a series of internal State Department emails showing that on-site US officials reported within hours of last month's deadly Benghazi consulate attack that the al Qaida affiliate, Ansar al-Sharia, had already claimed responsibility. The emails provide the most detailed information yet about what officials knew in the initial hours after the attack. Tbe emails also clearly raise questions about why Susan Rice, the US Ambassador to the UN, claimed five days later that it was a "spontaneous" reaction to an anti-Islam film. A member of the group suspected of participating in the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi has been arrested and is being held in Tunisia, but Fox News reported earlier that American officials have been denied access to the suspect. The emails obtained by Fox News were sent by the State Department to a group of national security groups, including the White House Situation Room, the Pentagon, the FBI and the Director of National Intelligence. Fox News reports that an estimated 300 to 400 national security figures received the emails in real time as the raid was ongoing. The timestamps on the emails are all US Eastern Time and often include the subheading SBU, shorthand for"Sensitive But Unclassified." The first email indicates that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and other personnel were "in the compound safe haven." Officials later discovered that Stevens and three other Americans had died in the attack. According to the Fox News timeline: (1) The first email was sent at 4:05 p.m. ET with the subject line: "U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack (SBU).""The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack,....Embassy Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots... explosions have been heard as well... Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support. The operations Center will provide updates as available." (2) The second email came at 4:54 p.m. ET, with a subject line: "Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi (SBU)""Embassy Tripoli reports the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi has stopped and the compound has been cleared. A response team is on site attempting to locate COM personnel." (3) The third email came at 6:07 p.m. ET and was sent to a different email list but still included the White House Situation Room address and a subject line of "Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack (SBU).""Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli." These emails on the day of the attack challenge not only the initial statements made by the White House and the State Department, including UN Ambassador Rice, but also recent claims that they were basing the early statements on the intelligence they had at the time. For example, State Department official Patrick Kennedy recently testified to Congress that anyone in Rice's position would have made the same statements about the attack being spontaneous. The newly uncovered emails contradict these Obama administration positions, clearly showing the involvement of a militant group whose agenda is to establish an Islamic state in eastern Libya. Despite this, White House Press Secretary Carney recently said: "Based on information that we -- our initial information ... we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack;...we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video." Carney went on to say "that is what we know" based on"concrete evidence, not supposition." Dear readers, we now have clear evidence of either a deliberate attempt to mislead the American people for political presidential election purposes...or...the muddling incompetence of a White House and State Department who had no idea how to deal with the Benghazi consulate attack - probably having had, prior to the attack, no idea how to provide adequate security in an especially dangerous diplomatic station - but who are in either case responsible for the asassination of Ambassador Chris Stevens and his 3 colleagues. It is time to strip the veil from this unusually despicable action and assess blame and punishment.