Official: Benghazi Looked Like Terror Attack From Start
Diplomat Hicks contradicts initial White House account of attack
By Ruth Brown, Newser Staff
Posted May 5, 2013 5:33 PM CDT
Glass, debris and overturned furniture are strewn inside a room in the gutted U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, after an attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, Wednesday,...   (AP Photo/Ibrahim Alaguri)

(Newser) – A senior US diplomat has disputed the White House's account of the attack on the US mission in Libya last year, and claims that the State Department's review "let people off the hook," CNN reports. In an interview with congressional investigators, Greg Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission in Libya, is quoted as saying: "I thought it was a terrorist attack from the get-go. I think everybody in the mission thought it was a terrorist attack from the beginning." This stands in contrast to Obama administration claims that the attack initially appeared to have erupted from a spontaneous protest. "I never reported a demonstration," he said. "I reported an attack on the consulate."

Hicks said his "jaw hit the floor" when Susan Rice appeared on US talk shows questioning Libyan President Mohammed Magariaf's claims that the attack was executed by Islamic extremists. "The spokesperson of the most powerful country in the world has basically said that the president of Libya is either a liar or doesn't know what he's talking about," he said. "The impact of that is immeasurable." Hicks' remarks were quoted during an interview with Rep. Darrell Issa, who heads the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, on CBS News' Face The Nation today. Hicks and two other officials are expected to testify on the attacks in front of the committee on Wednesday.

View 1 more image
More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
Official: Benghazi Looked Like Terrorist Attack From Beginning is...
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Showing 3 of 136 comments
May 6, 2013 1:41 PM CDT
TRUTH BE TOLD ...... WHY was Ambassador Stevens assassinated in Benghazi on 09-11-2012 .. and why did the CIA and State and Defense departments cover it up .. with false and misleading information? EVENTS leading up yo Ambassador Stevens assassination? (1) Qaddafi caught the western oil companies stealing and not reporting oil profits. (2) Qaddafi was going to Nationalize the western and Arab oil companies in Libya. (3) The western governments wanted Qaddafi dead because he was going to nationalize their oil companies .. and the Arab oil states wanted Qaddafi dead, because he was selling Libyan oil at cost to poor African countries and lowering their profits. --- The western and Arab government for separate reasons .. both wanted Qaddafi dead .. but .. they needed the African Union to support their plan .. but the Africans refused .. so .. they got the black Obama to do it for them. (4) Ambassador Stevens was investigating these allegations from patriotic Libyans .. and was getting documents to support the allegations. --- Lists of Libyan witnesses, and copies of oil contracts, and actual oil production figures. ---- These documents were with Stevens and (information analyst) Smith .. when they were killed .. and 'now' they have disappeared. (5) ONLY the CIA and State and Defense Departments knew the (exact time and place) Ambassador Stevens was alone and unguarded with (informational analyst) Smith .. and could easily be assassinated .. without fear of his CIA ex-navy Seal bodyguards being present .. and knew the (exact time and place) Woods and Doherty would be together, the next day. MY opinion is? ....Is this all coincidental, or is it a conspiracy? .. theory? ---------------------- REALLY?
May 6, 2013 1:28 PM CDT
Has anyone considered that this may have been allowed to occur to take out a mole in our ranks?
May 6, 2013 10:27 AM CDT
Even Fox and Friends is skeptical of a Benghazi coverup now.