Flashback: Susan Rice on 5 Sunday Shows Blaming Benghazi Attack on a YouTube Video

Susan Rice, then Obama’s Ambassador to the United Nations, went on five separate Sunday television news shows on September 16, 2012, and falsely claimed that the Islamic Benghazi attack was not pre-planned but a “spontaneous” reaction to a Mohammed YouTube video, which at the time was mostly obscure and unwatched.

On September 11, 2012, Islamic terrorists attacked the American compound in Benghazi, Libya. Four Americans were killed, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens.

After the attack, Susan Rice and the Obama administration went out of their way to give the Islamic terrorists an excuse for the attack. The pretext: an obscure, low-budget YouTube video about Mohammed.

9/16/2012 TRANSCRIPTS & VIDEO LINKS:
Here is Susan Rice on 5 Sunday TV shows blaming the obscure YouTube video for the Islamic attack on our consulate in Benghazi.
– ‘Fox News Sunday’ with Chris Wallace

WALLACE: Joining us now our ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice. Ambassador, welcome back to “Fox News Sunday.”

AMB. SUSAN RICE, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: Thank you.

WALLACE: This week, there have been anti-American protests in two dozen countries across the Islamic world. The White House says it has nothing to do with the president’s policies.

Let’s watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAY CARNEY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: This is not a case of protests directed at the United States writ large or at U.S. policy. This is in response to a video that is offensive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: You don’t really believe that?

RICE: Chris, absolutely I believe that. In fact, it is the case. We had the evolution of the Arab spring over the last many months. But what sparked the recent violence was the airing on the Internet of a very hateful very offensive video that has offended many people around the world.

[…]

RICE: …Obviously, the last couple of days have been some what better. But we are vigilant and we are of the view that is not an expression of hospitality in the broadest sense towards the United States or U.S. policy. It’s approximately a reaction to this video and it’s a hateful video that had nothing to do with the United States and which we find disgusting and reprehensible.

– CBS’s Sunday Show ‘Face the Nation’ with Bob Schieffer

SUSAN RICE: …So we’ll want to see the results of that investigation to draw any definitive conclusions. But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy–

BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.

SUSAN RICE: –sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi …

– ABC’s ‘This Week’ with Jake Tapper

RICE: Well, Jake, first of all, it’s important to know that there’s an FBI investigation that has begun and will take some time to be completed. That will tell us with certainty what transpired.

But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.

[…]

RICE: It’s actually the opposite. First of all, let’s be clear about what transpired here. What happened this week in Cairo, in Benghazi, in many other parts of the region…

TAPPER: Tunisia, Khartoum…

RICE: … was a result — a direct result of a heinous and offensive video that was widely disseminated, that the U.S. government had nothing to do with, which we have made clear is reprehensible and disgusting. We have also been very clear in saying that there is no excuse for violence, there is — that we have condemned it in the strongest possible terms.

– NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ with David Gregory

MS. RICE: Well, David, we can’t predict with any certainty. But let’s remember what has transpired over the last several days. This is a response to a hateful and offensive video that was widely disseminated throughout the Arab and Muslim world. Obviously, our view is that there is absolutely no excuse for violence and that– what has happened is condemnable, but this is a– a spontaneous reaction to a video

– CNN’s ‘State of the Union’ with Candy Crowley

RICE: Well, Candy, first of all, let’s recall what has happened in the last several days. There was a hateful video that was disseminated on the internet. It had nothing to do with the United States government and it’s one that we find disgusting and reprehensible. It’s been offensive to many, many people around the world.

That sparked violence in various parts of the world, including violence directed against western facilities including our embassies and consulates. That violence is absolutely unacceptable, it’s not a response that one can ever condone when it comes to such a video. And we have been working very closely and, indeed, effectively with the governments in the region and around the world to secure our personnel, secure our embassy, condemn the violent response to this video.

SUSAN RICE: NO REGRETS
Of course, Susan Rice has no regrets for lying to America on Benghazi:

THE VIDEO-MAKER NOW HOMELESS:
Blamed for Benghazi: Filmmaker jailed after attack now lives in poverty, fear

Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the Coptic Christian whose short video “The Innocence of Muslims” was initially faulted for sparking the Sept. 11, 2012 terror attack at U.S. diplomatic compounds in Libya, is now living in a homeless shelter run by First Southern Baptist Church in Buena Park, Calif. He has served time in prison, been shamed publicly by the White House and threatened with death.

RELATED:
– Obama’s Disinformation Campaign on Libya (Video)
– Obama Knew Al-Qaeda Behind Libya Attack within 24 Hours
– Hillary Clinton No $$$ for Benghazi Security, but Spent Millions for Art, Kindles, Obama Books, Mosques Restorations, …
– Obama Partying in New York…A Week after Embassy Attacks in Libya, Egypt (Photos, Video)

WTC Bombing 20 Years ago…under President Bill Clinton

THE FIRST WORLD TRADE CENTER BOMBING…UNDER PRESIDENT CLINTON Islamic terrorists attacked Americans many times before September 11, 2001. One of those attacks was the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993. The Morning of Feb. 26, 1993 “The epicenter was the parking garage beneath the World Trade Center, where a massive eruption carved out a nearly 100-foot crater several stories deep and several more high,” the FBI summarized.

“On the morning of Feb. 26, 1993, Eyad Ismoil drove a rented Ryder Ford F350 Econoline truck packed with 1,500 pounds of fertilizer-based explosives into level B-2 of the underground garage beneath the World Trade Center. Ismoil departed, leaving a timing device set to detonate the explosives a while later. At 12:18 p.m., the bomb exploded, killing six, creating a crater 150 feet in diameter that blew a hole five floors deep in the parking garage. The towers, however, did not fall. […] Yousef, the mastermind of the plot, later said he had hoped to kill tens of thousands. The explosives were manufactured at a Jersey City apartment, using chemicals ordered from a supply company. They were placed in the truck at a rented storage shed alongside three tanks of compressed hydrogen gas, purchased to enhance the destructive power of the explosives. The plotters, including Yousef and Yasin, built the bombs using manuals brought from Pakistan.”

1993 WTC BOMBING: An Islamic Attack

Terrorist Organizations: Al-Qaeda, Al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya, Liberation Army Fifth Battalion Al Fareeq Al Rokn, Abu Bakr Al Makkee.

Terrorists: Ramzi Yousef (Operational Commander), Eyad Ismoil (Attacker). Facilitators: Mohammad Salameh, Nidal Ayyad, Abdul Rahman Yasin, Mahmud Abouhalima, Ahmad Mohammed Ajaj. Financier: Khalid Shaikh Mohammed

Victims: Six people were killed almost instantly: John DiGiovanni, Robert Kirkpatrick, Stephen Knapp, William Macko, Wilfredo Mercado and Monica Smith. “Smoke and flames began filling the wound and streaming upward into the building. Those who weren’t trapped were soon pouring out of the building—many panic-stricken and covered in soot. More than a thousand people were hurt in some way, some badly, with crushed limbs,” the FBI recounted.

The FBI Provides more Details of the Attack and the Terrorists “An Islamic fundamentalist named Mohammad Salameh had rented the vehicle, we learned, and on March 4, an FBI SWAT team arrested him as he tried in vain to get his $400 deposit back. One clue led to another and we soon had in custody three more suspects—Nidal Ayyad, Mahmoud Abouhalima, and Ahmed Ajaj. We’d also found the apartment where the bomb was built and a storage locker containing dangerous chemicals, including enough cyanide gas to wipe out a town. All four men were tried, convicted, and sentenced to life. The shockwave from the attack continued to reverberate. Following the unfolding connections, the task force soon uncovered a second terrorist plot to bomb a series of New York landmarks simultaneously, including the U.N. building, the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels, and the federal plaza where our office in New York is housed. On June 24, 1994, FBI agents stormed a warehouse in Queens and caught several members of a terrorist cell in the act of assembling bombs. Meanwhile, the mastermind of the World Trade Center bombing was still on the run—and up to no good. We’d learned his name—Ramzi Yousef—within weeks after the attack and discovered he was planning more attacks, including the simultaneous bombing of a dozen U.S. international flights. Yousef was captured in Pakistan in February 1995, returned to America, and convicted along with the van driver, Eyad Ismoil. A seventh plotter, Abdul Yasin, remains at large. We later learned from Yousef that his Trade Center plot was far more sinister. He wanted the bomb to topple one tower, with the collapsing debris knocking down the second. The attack turned out to be something of a deadly dress rehearsal for 9/11; with the help of Yousef’s uncle Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, al Qaeda would later return to realize Yousef’s nightmarish vision.” Bill Clinton’s Failures Unleashed Global Terror Via The Washington Times: The Clinton foreign policy was to get re-elected. Therefore, anything that might be controversial had to be avoided. So, from the beginning to the end of the administration, the Clintons “demanded absolute proof before acting against terrorists.” This high bar guaranteed inaction. At the beginning of his term, after the attack of Feb. 26, 1993, Mr. Clinton refused to admit that the World Trade Center had been bombed. Later, he referred to it only as “regrettable” and “treated the disaster… like a twister in Arkansas.” Earlier, he had “urged the public not to ‘overreact’ to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.”

SOURCES: – Global Security: 1993 World Trade Center truck bombing – FBI: ●http://www.fbi.gov/page2/feb08/tradebom_022608.html – Washington Times: ●http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2003/sep/1/20030901-102359-9067r/?page=all – United States vs. Yousef, et. al., indictment. – The 9-11 Commission Report. July 22, 2004. RELATED – Have you forgotten? World Trade Center bombing, 20 years later – LIST OF MAJOR ISLAMIC ATTACKS & PLOTS ON AMERICA…before 9/11

Hillary Clinton No $$$ for Benghazi Security, but Spent Millions for Art, Kindles, Obama Books, Mosques Restorations, …

(Image by Looking Spoon via Weasel Zippers)

During yesterday’s Benghazi testimony, Hillary Clinton lied about the State Department not having enough funding to provide proper security for the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. But in fact the State Department ($50+ billion dollar annual budget) had enough money for these items: ● $4.5 million for Art in Embassies ● $16 million dollars on 2,500 kindle book readers at the drastically inflated price of $6,600 per device (that retails for $189) ● $$ Millions to preserve mosques and minarets in 27 different Islamic countries ● $150,000+ for a Chevy Volt and its charging station for the US Embassy in Austria ● $150,000 to spend on a book about the residence of the U.S. Ambassador to Italy ● $79,000 to spend on Obama’s books ● $20,000 on a portrait of Obama And also: ● $7.9 billion dollars for Obama’s Global Health Initiative ● $2.9 billion for international debt relief ● $2.2 billion to strengthen democratic institutions in Pakistan ● $770 million dollar Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund for the failed Arab Spring which has put extremist Islamists in power ● $587 million for student exchange programs ● $469 million for global climate change ● $200 million dollars were wasted on Iraqi police training that never went anywhere The Obama administration repeatedly rejected requests for more security in Benghazi, even though Islamist militias attacked the consulate multiple times prior to the 9/11/2012 attack and Ambassador Stevens repeatedly notified the administration about increasing security threats in Libya. MORE Details and sources via FrontPageMag.com here and here. RELATED – Hillary Clinton Lies at Libya Hearing about not Blaming the Mohammed Video

Hillary Clinton Lies at Libya Hearing about not Blaming the Mohammed Video

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (Democrat) lied today while testifying at U.S. House hearing about last year’s Islamic terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, where four Americans were killed. “Congress is investigating whether the State Department denied a request for extra security at that outpost earlier in the year and what actions were taken in the moments after the attack began,” reports C-SPAN. The Obama administration decided to blame an obscure YouTube video about Mohammed for the attack instead of giving the facts to the American public. JANUARY 23, 2013 Today at the hearing, Congressman Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) asked Hillary Clinton about the Mohammed video that the Obama administration originally blamed for the terrorist attack: REP. KINZINGER: “When you briefed us, you said unequivocally this was a result of a video and I remember in fact you got pretty upset about it when somebody suggested this was a terrorist attack.” HILLARY CLINTON: “With respect to the video. I did not say that it was about the video for Libya, it certainly was for many of the other places where we were watching these disturbances.” [See video via: C-SPAN.org (Video mark 1:36:10), or Fox News Insider]

SEPTEMBER 14, 2012

But on 9/14/2012 while standing in front of the caskets of the four Americans killed in Benghazi, Hillary Clinton blamed the Mohammed video for the attack. Transcript via America Times: HILLARY CLINTON, 9/14/2012: “This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with. It is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless, and it is totally unacceptable.” (Video mark 08:26)

RELATED – Obama Runs Apology TV Ad in Pakistan Disavowing YouTube Video and Apologizing for our Free Speech (9/20/2012) – News about the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya

“Palestinian People” – A 20th Century Invention to Legitimize Terrorism

There has never been an independent state in Palestine ruled by Muslims Palestine was an ancient name for the geographic region of Israel or Terra Sancta ruled either by Jews or Christians. No ‘Palestinian Arab people’ existed until 1920, when the British occupying force carved out a ‘Palestine.’ The Invented Palestinian People: “No Arabic-speaking Muslims identified themselves as ‘Palestinian’ until 1920, when, in rapid order this appellation and identity was adopted by the Muslim Arabs living in the British mandate of Palestine.” PLO leader admitted the “Palestinian people” are just an invention to unite Arabs and to destroy Israel: “The Palestinian people does not exist…Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism,” said Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) executive committee member, Zahir Muhsein, in a 1977 interview with the Dutch newspaper Trouw.

PHILISTIA IN THE TIME OF JESUS (4 B.C. – 30 A.D.) but there was never a “Nation of Palestine” as Islamists and leftists want us to believe. In reality, Palestine was an ancient name for a vague geographic region of Israel or Terra Sancta ruled either by Jews or Christians. No “Palestinian Arab people” existed until 1920, when the British occupying force carved out a “Palestine.” (Map via the Library of Congress) -

Creating “Palestine” for political purposes to justify and legitimize terrorism: The term Palestine (in Arabic) was an ancient name for the general geographic region that is more or less today’s Israel. The name derives from the Philistines, who originated from the Eastern Mediterranean and invaded the region in the eleventh and twelfth centuries B.C. The Philistines were apparently from Greece, or perhaps Crete, or the Aegean Islands, or Ionia. They seem to be related to the Bronze Age Greeks, and they spoke a language akin to Mycenaean Greek. Their descendants were still living on the shores of the Mediterranean when roman invaders arrived a thousand years later. The Romans corrupted the name to “Palestina,” and the area under the sovereignty of their littoral city states became known as “Philistia.” Six hundred years later, the Arab invaders called the region “Falastin.” Throughout all subsequent history, the name designated only a vague geographical entity. There was never a nation of “Palestine,” never a people known as the “Palestinians,” nor any notion of “historic Palestine.” The region never enjoyed any sovereign autonomy, but instead remained under successive foreign sovereign domains, from the Umayyads and Abbasids to the Fatimids, Ottomans and British. During the British Mandate period (1922–1948), the Arabs of the area had their own designation for the region: Balad esh-Sham (the country, or province, of Damascus). In early 1947, in fact, when the UN was exploring the possibility of the partition of British Mandatory Palestine into two states, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs, various Arab political and academic spokespersons vociferously protested against such a division because, they argued, the region was really a part of southern Syria. Because no such people as “Palestinians” had ever existed, it would be an injustice to Syria to create a state ex nihilo at the expense of Syrian sovereign territory. During the nineteen years from Israel’s victory in 1948 to Israel’s victory in the Six-Day war, all that remained of the territory initially set aside for the Arabs of British Mandatory Palestine under the conditions of the UN partition was the West Bank, under illegal Jordanian sovereignty, and the Gaza Strip, under illegal Egyptian rule. Never during these nineteen years did any Arab leader anywhere in the world argue for the right of national self-determination for the Arabs of these territories. Even Yassir Arafat, from his earliest terrorist days until 1967, used the term “Palestinians” only to refer to the Arabs who lived under, or had fled from, Israeli sovereignty; and the term “Palestine” only to refer to Israel in its pre-1967 borders. In the PLO’s original founding Charter (or Covenant), Article 24 states: “this Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the west Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in the Gaza Strip or the Himmah area.” For Arafat, “Palestine” was not the west Bank or the Gaza Strip, which after 1948 belonged to other Arab states. The only “homeland” for the PLO in 1964 was the State of Israel. However, in response to the Six-Daywar and Arafat’s mentoring by the Soviets and their allies, the PLO revised its Charter on July 17, 1968, to remove the language of Article 24, thereby newly asserting a “Palestinian” claim of sovereignty to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Part of the reframing of the conflict, along with adopting the identity of an “oppressed people” and “victim of colonialism,” then, was the creation, ex nihilo, of “historic Palestine” and the ancient “Palestinian people” who had lived in their “homeland” from “time immemorial,” who could trace their “heritage” back to the Canaanites, who were forced from their homeland by the Zionists, and who had the inalienable right granted by international law and universal justice to use terror to reclaim their national identity and political self-determination. That this was a political confection was, perhaps inadvertently, revealed to the West by Zahir Muhse’in, a member of the PLO Executive Committee, in a 1977 interview with the Amsterdam-based newspaper Trouw: “The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism. [Emphasis added.] Arafat himself asserted the same principle on many occasions. In his authorized biography he says, “The Palestinian people have no national identity. I, Yasir Arafat, man of destiny, will give them that identity through conflict with Israel.” But even these admissions—that the concept of a “Palestinian people” and a “Palestinian homeland” were invented for political purposes to justify and legitimize terrorism and genocide—could not stem the enthusiasm of western leaders. Within the space of a few years, the Middle East conflict with Israel was radically reframed. No longer was little Israel the vulnerable David standing against the massive Goliath of the Arab world. As the PLO’s Communist-trained leaders saw the inroads that Vietnam, Cuba, and other “liberation struggles” had made in the west, Arafat promoted the same script for the Palestinians. Now it was Israel who was the bullying Goliath, a colonial power in the Middle East oppressing the impoverished, unarmed, helpless, hapless, and hopeless Palestinians. Despite the changing imagery, however, one thing remained constant. From his earliest days, Arafat was clear that the PLO’s aim was “not to impose our will on [Israel], but to destroy it in order to take its place . . . not to subjugate the enemy but to destroy him.” The Palestinian nationalism that he and his Communist advisers created would be the only national movement for political self-determination in the entire world, and across all of world history, to have the destruction of a sovereign state and the genocide of a people as its only raison d’etre [reason for existence]. The Year the Arabs Discovered Palestine: Judging from news reports, one might think that Palestinian nationalism has been active as long as Jews and Arabs have been living at the eastern edge of the Mediterra­nean Sea…there is an understandable tendency in the West to accept at face value [this] insistence that the Palestinians have always sought an independent Palestinian state. In fact, this is far from the truth. The idea of an Arab state resting between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea is, rather, a twentieth-century concept. In­deed, its origins can be traced with surpris­ing precision to a single year — 1920. In January 1920, Palestinian nationalism hard­ly existed; by December of that critical year, it had been born. More: In fact, the Palestinian identity goes back, not to antiquity, but precisely to 1920. No “Palestinian Arab people” existed at the start of 1920 but by December it took shape in a form recognizably similar to today’s. Until the late nineteenth century, residents living in the region between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean identified themselves primarily in terms of religion: Moslems felt far stronger bonds with remote co-religionists than with nearby Christians and Jews. Living in that area did not imply any sense of common political purpose. […] Palestine, then a secular way of saying Eretz Yisra’el or Terra Sancta, embodied a purely Jewish and Christian concept, one utterly foreign to Moslems, even repugnant to them. This distaste was confirmed in April 1920, when the British occupying force carved out a “Palestine.” Moslems reacted very suspiciously, rightly seeing this designation as a victory for Zionism. Less accurately, they worried about it signaling a revival in the Crusader impulse. No prominent Moslem voices endorsed the delineation of Palestine in 1920; all protested it.

Reuters, 9/12/2012: Al-Qaeda-tied Group behind Libya Consulate Attack

The day after the Benghazi consulate attack, even liberal news outlets like Reuters were reporting that the attack was planned and may be terrorism. But the Obama administration preferred to blame the obscure YouTube video. SUMMARY On Sept. 12, 2012, Reuters reported that: – Groups linked to al Qaeda may be responsible. – The attack was planned (not spontaneous). – The attack may be retaliation for the al Qaeda Libyan leader killed by a U.S. drone earlier this year. – On 9/10/2012, the day before the attack, al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri urged Libyans to avenge the killing of his second in command. – The assault took place in two waves.
	(Click image to enlarge it)

REUTERS reported on September 12, 2012: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/13/us-usa-libya-attack-idUSBRE88B1C620120913 (Emphasis added) Libya attack may have been planned and organized, U.S. officials say By Mark Hosenball WASHINGTON | Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:52pm EDT (Reuters) – The attack that killed the U.S. ambassador and three other American diplomats in Benghazi, Libya, may have been planned and organized in advance, U.S. government officials said on Wednesday. The officials said there were indications that members of a militant faction calling itself Ansar al Sharia – which translates as Supporters of Islamic Law – may have been involved in organizing the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya’s second-largest city. They also said some reporting from the region suggested that members of Al-Qaeda’s north Africa-based affiliate, known as Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, may have been involved. “It bears the hallmarks of an organized attack” and appeared to be preplanned, one U.S. official said. The officials asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive information. More specific details about the possible role of militant groups or cells in the attack were not immediately available. […] Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith and two other Americans who have not yet been identified were killed when gunmen stormed the consulate and another U.S. safe house in Benghazi on Tuesday. A London think tank run by a former Libyan militant leader suggested on Tuesday that not only was the Benghazi attack “well planned,” but that it may have been retaliation for an American drone attack that killed a Libyan leader of al Qaeda’s core command group earlier this year. The Quilliam Foundation said that 24 hours before the Benghazi incident, al Qaeda leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, distributed a video to militant websites in which he confirmed the death of his second in command, known as Abu Yahya al-Libi, and urged Libyans to avenge his killing. Quilliam, whose president, Noman Benotman, once was a leader of an anti-Gaddafi militant faction known as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, said that according to its sources, up to 20 militants had prepared for a military assault. Quilliam said the assault on the Benghazi Consulate took place in two waves. After the first wave, U.S. officials arranged an evacuation of the Consulate by Libyan security forces. As the evacuation was taking place, a second wave of attacks was launched against U.S. officials who had already been moved to a supposedly secure location, Quilliam said.