Judicial Watch (JW) in a release announced their special report, “The Benghazi Attack of September 11, 2012: Analysis and Further Questions from a Diplomatic Security Service Regional Security Officer and Special Agent” on Tuesday in which they analyzed the Obama administration’s actions before, during, and after the assault, as well as the State Department’s commitment to protect overseas diplomats.
Judicial Watch said, “The new report contains in-depth analysis, conducted exclusively for Judicial Watch by former State Department Security Special Agent Raymond Fournier, examines the critical time period leading up to the Benghazi attack, when repeated requests for increased security were shunned by top State Department officials. It also examines the Obama administration’s official claim that “an obscure Internet video” triggered the attacks, as well as apparently false claims that four top State Department officials had resigned in response to the Department’s December 18 Accountability Review Board report on the attack. And it raises questions as to the internal problems within the Department that may continue to leave overseas diplomats without adequate security.”
“As the [Accountability Review] Board’s report makes clear,” the Judicial Watch Special Report concludes, “the September 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi resulted from a wide range of strategic and tactical failures by State Department officials. Chief among them was the fateful decision to circumvent established security regulations by designating the diplomatic post in Benghazi a ‘Special Mission Compound,’ ignoring repeated requests for additional security resources by Diplomatic Security personnel on the ground, and entrusting the security of the SMC [Special Mission Compound] to a local militia group with suspected ties to radical Islamists. As Special Agent Fournier notes in his assessment of the tragedy, there were also long-standing cultural problems within the Department of State that hinder the ability of Diplomatic Security agents to adequately protect our diplomats overseas.”
Some of the questions raised by Judicial Watch in their Benghazi report were:
• Who at the State Department was responsible for opening up and continuing the operation of the “Special Mission Compound” in the unstable environment of Benghazi, overriding physical security standards for diplomatic facilities?
According to Fournier, “The Department’s unexplained decision to create a new category of diplomatic structure, i.e. the ‘Special Mission Compound,’” for the purpose of “skirting the established physical security standards” for embassies and consulates was the “critical error” leading to the deadly attack.
• Did the Director of Diplomatic Security or his immediate subordinates have authority to countermand the Department’s desire to open “SMC Benghazi?”
In the Judicial Watch report, Fournier cautions that, “Frequently, security policy and standards are set aside as inconvenient, restraining, time consuming or simply less important relative to loftier goals foreign policy goals prosecuted by the Department’s elite. One need go no further than Benghazi to see an example of the aforementioned managerial arrogance with the Department.”
• Why did Ambassador Stevens travel to Benghazi, so close to the anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks?
The Judicial Watch Special Report revealed that the State Department had warnings in July, August, and September of 2012 advising against travel to the Mideast in general and Benghazi in particular.
• Why were two unmanned aerial vehicles requested to record the deadly events as they unfolded in Benghazi while more lethal air support options were not on station?
“Our Special Report shows that the State Department has conspicuously avoided many issues about the Benghazi attack,” stated Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. “Our concern is that security has taken a back seat to politics at the State Department. The willingness of the State Department and the White House to lie about the Benghazi attack does not inspire confidence that the Benghazi security failures will be seriously addressed. In the meantime, our diplomatic personnel may remain at risk as politicians and bureaucrats avoid accountability.”
Hillary Clinton was instrumental in advancing the false narrative that the internet video sparked the attacks. For example, as the Judicial Watch Special Report documents, at a September 14, 2012, even honoring the four victims of the Benghazi attack, Secretary Clinton made the following statement: “We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen the rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful video that we had nothing to do with.”
The report came on the eve of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s testimony in which she set blame on U.S. laws rather than what really happened at the Benghazi, Libya Consulate in which four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens were murdered by Islamic terrorists.
Judicial Watch stated that they have more than 10 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests pending with various Executive departments and agencies seeking records relating to the Benghazi attack.
It was hopeful that Secretary Clinton would have come forward in addressing those issues and questions in her testimony that occurred yesterday.
It appears Secretary Clinton did not answer many of those questions.