Originally Posted by thunder1
In the days after the attack, exactly what happened was unclear. Many different streams of intelligence were being received by the State Department all at once, and they made their best estimate of the situation based on the entirety of what was going on in the region at that time.
You seem to be parsing what they said on the 16th of September, with what they later learned, and indeed reported in October. Are you trying to back date their October reporting of what happened to before Rice made her statement on the 16th of September? Worse, you seem to be coming to your own conclusions as to how such events transpire. Your speculation now has no greater merit than that of the State Department in the days following the attack.
Well, the State Department has more merit, because they're actually privy to first or second hand information - not spin doctor reports from butthurt pundits and bloggers.