The White House was told the Libya attack was a terrorist attack but stayed with the protest story for two weeks. Why? Are they captives of their own propaganda? Did they believe the truth wouldn’t come out? This reminds of the imperial Nixon presidency where their official emanations became so obviously false and self-serving that it was ludicrous.
Many though appear to not understand how a genuine protest can be used by extremists to further their goals.
It now appears questionable that the anti-Muslim film, which sparked a violent protest against the U.S. Embassy in Cairo earlier on Sept. 11, played a significant role in the Benghazi attack. Some U.S. officials have not foreclosed that possibility.
I disagree. Seasoned organizers wait for a trigger event to inflame the populace then exploit it for their own ends. The anti-Muslim film was a perfect trigger event, which was then used as cover to carry out an already planned attack. What better cover could there be than several hundred screaming, angry protesters who probably had no idea what the extremists were planning?
The report did not allege the attacks were a reaction to the anti-Muslim film, but acknowledged it was possible that the attackers sought to use an outbreak of violence in Cairo over the film, which insulted the Prophet Mohammad, as a pretext for attacks.
When I was in a far left group, we often used events that angered people as ways to organize, then lead the protests, if we could manage it. This is Organizing 101 and has nothing to do with ideology and everything to do with tactics and strategy.