Here’s a quick flashback to the oft-quoted New York Times story the Left claims vindicated the Obama administration while coincidentally plowing the road for a smoother Hillary run in 2016 — not that the Times has decided to endorse her yet (wink wink nudge nudge backslap shove):
Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault.
The Times report also found that the attack was “largely” caused by anger over the YouTube video.
Contradicting the Times, last week, Bill Gertz reported that the U.S. is seeking Muhammad Jamal, who is identified as an al Qaeda member, for his suspected role in the Benghazi attack.
U.S. officials suspect that a former Guantanamo Bay detainee played a role in the attack on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, and are planning to designate the group he leads as a foreign terrorist organization, according to officials familiar with the plans.
Militiamen under the command of Abu Sufian bin Qumu, the leader of Ansar al-Sharia in the Libyan city of Darnah, participated in the attack that killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, U.S. officials said.
Qumu fought alongside the Taliban against the United States in Afghanistan; he then fled to Pakistan and was later arrested in Peshawar. He was turned over to the United States and held at Guantanamo Bay.
He has a “long-term association with Islamic extremist jihad and members of al-Qaida and other extremist groups,” according to the military files. “Detainee’s alias is found on a list of probable al-Qaida personnel receiving monthly stipends.”
A search of the New York Times’ website for “Abu Sufian bin Qumu” brings up this most recent result from April 2011: “Libyan, Once a Detainee, Is Now a U.S. Ally of Sorts.”
It depends on what your definition of “ally” is.
The ball is now in the NYT’s court, and the relevant question for them is here (language warning).**Written by Doug PowersTwitter @ThePowersThatBeblog comments powered by Disqus