Alas, he remains a stalwart terrorism analyst (none better in my book) working for Long War Journal and the Weekly Standard. His latest column is a reminder of why it really doesn't matter whether General Petraeus or the White House massaged or didn't massage the Rice talking points because the attack in Libya was AQ-related either way...
While there was no film protest in Benghazi, however, there are reasons to suspect that the events in Egypt and Libya on Sept. 11 are linked. But that link isn’t an anti-Islam film. They are linked by the fact that known al Qaeda-affiliated individuals were directly involved in both,
.. It is not a coincidence that an al Qaeda flag was raised in the place of the stars and stripes in Cairo, or that protesters chanted: “Obama! Obama! We are all Osama!”In what may seem a bending of space-time, CNN has actually been all over this story from the get-go. Nic Robertson had a piece about the Cairo protest before the riot began; later they found Ambassador Stevens' diary in the burned out mission, which stated he believed he was on an AQ 'hit list' and came under fire from the State Department for going to press about it (which Hillary
All of those stories were buried in the reportorial rubble but all were instructive as to what happened. Few other journalists, even with an obvious Pulitzer dangling, have delved into how the obscure Nikoula video came to be manipulated by the Egyptian Islamists (which appears to be very fertile ground) or how it was used to advance the transfer of their hero Sheikh Rahman from a US prison back to Egypt. Even CNN refused to follow up on their own reporting. There's apparently a red line all refuse to cross regardless.
But even if one ignores everything CNN reported and the Petraeus he-said, he-said there's still this--the president of the Libyan Assembly told anyone who would listen on day one that it was a terrorist attack featuring foreign fighters. Apparently few believed him, including those who briefed our Ambassador to the UN.