Benghazi: New York Times vs US Intel Officials

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.


Allied media outlets and lefty think-tanks have trotted out David Kilpatrick’s dishonest New York Times essay on Benghazi as some sort of definitive reporting in regard to its claims that Al Qaeda was not involved and that the attack was caused by a YouTube video.

Kilpatrick’s essay is all the stranger because it attempts to revive a cover up of information from US intelligence officials by Hillary’s people that was then tossed aside.

Thomas Joscelyn at the Weekly Standard quickly takes apart Kilpatrick’s presumptions and lies showing that US intelligence officials had reported all along and have continued stating that an Al Qaeda linked group was involved.

While Kilpatrick claims that…

I don’t believe that group was involved. I think that the reporting in our paper was citing some congressional officials saying they thought this Jamal group might have been involved. And the congressional officials in turn were citing a report in the Wall Street Journal and that report seems to me to the best of my knowledge to have come from Egyptian intelligence. And at the end of the day, what it asserts is just that this character Jamal may have run a training camp someplace and people who had been at that training camp may have been involved in the attack. So it’s…to my mind a bogus connection and also a tenuous connection and it is certainly not a connection that the New York Times has ever put its weight behind.

… here’s what the New York Times actually wrote…

Three Congressional investigations and a State Department inquiry are now examining the attack, which American officials said included participants from Ansar al-Shariah, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and the Muhammad Jamal network, a militant group in Egypt.

The report, which apparently David Kilpatrick never bothered to read, even though it came from his own newspaper, cites American officials, not Congressional officials or Egyptian intelligence or the Wall Street Journal.

The Wall Street Journal reports also quote US officials, not Egyptian intelligence or Congressional staffers or the Tooth Fairy.

So is David Kilpatrick incompetent or a liar? And can’t he be both?

In its October 18, 2013 designation of Jamal and his network as al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists, the UN noted the following with respect to Jamal: “Reported to be involved in the attack on the United States Mission in Benghazi, Libya, on 11 Sep. 2012.”

That’s a long way a story made up by the Wall Street Journal and a few Republican congressmen. If the UN incorporated material, it came from those same US officials who keep being quoted. And those officials ultimately answer to the White House, not to Congress.

David Kilpatrick might have gotten away with it. All he had to do was claim that those “initial reports” were wrong. Instead he bizarrely decided to claim that those reports never existed and that no one except a few crazy right-wingers ever said that Al Qaeda was involved.

And that was a brazen lie. And even if Kilpatrick and his New York Times bosses at Ready for Hillary 2016 had gone that route, the story hasn’t actually changed.

Three current U.S. intelligence officials tell The Weekly Standard that no new information has cast doubt on the Jamal network’s role in Benghazi. Each of the U.S. intelligence officials said that it is their current assessment that Jamal’s network was directly involved.

  • Robert Fanning

    Shoebot lays out an “Ironclad ” case for those willing to do the research.

    http://shoebat.com/…/benghazi-turning-a-blind-eye-for…/

    http://andreakrobson.wordpress.com/…/where-was-the…/

    Obama is the global head of the Muslim Brotherhood .Think big. Impeachment, the 2014 election, Hillary toast in 2016, the future of the Democratic Party. Banksters losing non-prosecutorial agreements with DOJ.
    it was Egypt who perpetrated Benghazi, and the Muslim brotherhood was in power at the time, and Obama is one of them, which is a very valid conclusion considering how many brotherhood members are in the White House, not to mention Valerie Jarrett, who’s father is also a member, and it was Obama and his state department who instigated the brotherhood getting into power in the first place, along with the fact that it was Obama’s people, if not him himself who called off any help that night, then Obama’s fingerprints are still all over the Benghazi scandal!Obama himself ordered the attack and was not just derelict in his responsibility to protect American interests, but was actually the one most responsible for the attack itself.

    http://www.politisite.com/…/retired-4-star-admiral…/

    “Please read this. A retired United States Navy Admiral tells the truth about Benghazi. Obama wanted to release the Blind Sheik, from federal prison in Colorado. He set up the terrorist attack to arrange an exchange of the Blind Sheik for our Ambassador, figuring to make himself look good to both the US voters, and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, of which the Blind Sheik is a member. He is the one that masterminded the first world trade center attack, the bomb that made a lot of smoke in the parking garage only.”

    http://shoebat.com/2013/06/30/benghazi-turning-a-blind-eye-for-the-blind-sheikh/

  • James Foard

    David Kilpatrick gets me so upset I have to reach for the baking soda. My ulcer’s acting up. I know there’s a proverb somewhere that says something about a fool opening his mouth. I think I’ll go look it up.

  • defcon 4

    As a source for news, the NYT is only second to NPR — as long as your don’t value the truth.