U.S. official says Benghazi consulate was "terrorist attack"

WASHINGTON Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:10pm EDT

The U.S. Consulate in Benghazi is seen in flames during a protest by an armed group said to have been protesting a film being produced in the United States September 11, 2012. REUTERS/Esam Al-Fetori

The U.S. Consulate in Benghazi is seen in flames during a protest by an armed group said to have been protesting a film being produced in the United States September 11, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Esam Al-Fetori

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi last week in which four Americans died was a "terrorist attack" that may have had an al Qaeda connection, a top U.S. counterterrorism official told Congress on Wednesday.

Rocket-propelled grenades and mortars struck the consulate on September 11, the anniversary of the 2001 attacks on the United States. U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans died.

"They were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy," Matthew Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said in response to a question at a Senate hearing.

Olsen said whether the attack was planned for September 11 was under investigation, but the information so far indicated it was "an opportunistic attack" that "began and evolved, and escalated over several hours."

There were well-armed militants in the area, he said. "What we don't have at this point is specific intelligence that there was a significant advance planning or coordination for this attack."

Whether or not the attack was planned well in advance has become a point of dispute between the Obama administration and Republican lawmakers who say it bears the hallmarks of a premeditated assault. Senior Libyan officials have said the attack was planned in advance.

At the same hearing, Republican Senator Susan Collins said she agreed with Libyan officials that the attack was premeditated, planned and associated with the September 11 anniversary. She expressed concern about the security at the consulate, where no Marines were present and security was handled by foreign nationals.

Olsen told lawmakers U.S. authorities are investigating who was responsible for the attack, and it appeared that a "number of different elements" were involved, including individuals connected to militant groups.

"As well, we are looking at indications that individuals involved in the attack may have had connections to al Qaeda or al Qaeda affiliates, particularly Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb," he said.

"The picture that is emerging is one where a number of different individuals were involved, so it's not necessarily an either-or proposition," Olsen said.

(Reporting by Susan Cornwell, Tabassum Zakaria and Donna Smith; Editing by Warren Strobel)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (14)
TheNewWorld wrote:
Well duh. 9-11. Kill an ambassador. 2+2=4.

Sep 19, 2012 1:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Crash866 wrote:
It was spontaneous. They just happened to plan a protest on 9/11 to which they bought Rocket-propelled grenades and mortars in their back pockets. Then they figured what the hell were here why not attack the US embassy for hours and then kill the US ambassador… Yeah not planned at all

Sep 19, 2012 2:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
nolalou2 wrote:
How amazing that commenters on this site have more information than the CIA or FBI, without the benefit of having conducted their own investigation! Jumping to conclusions is NOT a proof of anything, but hey when did that ever stop you idiots from adding your 2 cents! (which is about what your opinion is worth!)

Sep 19, 2012 2:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.