America and Libya give completely different versions of Benghazi consulate attack

A Libyan security guard holds a slogan, which reads in Arabic “Where is the security for us and for our guests” at the main entrance of the US consulate in Benghazi on September 18, 2012 (AFP Photo / Abdullah Doma)

 

One week after an assault in Benghazi left an US ambassador and three fellow Americans dead, conflicting reports into the details surrounding their passing from both the White House and Libyan officials leave the facts of the raid uncertain.

Tuesday marks one week since Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed after a US consulate in Benghazi was destroyed on September 11, but reports describing the events that led up to his death differ depending on the source. The Obama administration insists that a mob stormed the consulate to show their contempt with an American-made film that mocked the Islamic prophet Mohammad, but overseas the explanation is much different.

Some authorities in Libya say the attack on the consulate that killed Ambassador Stevens had roots with al-Qaeda, and that the White House has whitewashed the facts in order to make the explanation more favorable for American audiences on the eve of a presidential election.

On Tuesday this week, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters, “We have provided information about what we believe was the precipitating cause of the protest and violence based on the information that we have had available,” and that the US stands by the claim that “spontaneous” attacks on the consulate resulted in the loss of four Americans. Continue reading