[quote]claims from house republicans about classified evidence proving that there was a US government coverup[/quote]I don't necessarily believe there was a cover-up on the scale to which some conservatives are saying. I don't buy into the whole mess that it's a cover up for Hilary's election. [quote]Furthermore, MJN has not been conclusively linked to the attack[/quote]I don't know if you'll be able to read this, but [url=http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10000872396390444549204578020373444418316]it's widely reported that fighters belonging to MJN were, in fact, involved in the attack that night[/url]. The UN also said that some of the fighters were there. [quote]Finally, Ansar al-Sharia has not been proven to have been operating under Al-Qaeda leadership at the time of the attack.[/quote]I would actually disagree with you here. [url=http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2013/11/al_qaeda_and_the_thr_1.php]From Thomas Joscelyn of The Long War Journal[/url], Ansar al-Sharia is not separate and distinct from al-Qaeda (the LoC report said pretty much the same thing). A common argument that tries to distance ASL from AQ, is that ASL (or any Ansar al-Sharia's for that mater) is focused on "local" problems and AQ is only focused on the bigger picture. This is an entirely wrong analysis of al-Qaeda, who has since their inception been focused on both the "near enemy" and the "far enemy" (two terms UBL used to distinguish between "apostate" Arab regimes and the West). Part of al-Qaeda's overall goal is to implement Sharia and establish an Islamic state; of which, all Ansar al-Sharia's are open about their intentions of doing so. But let's just quote the Library of Congress's report here (I included a link in the OP): [quote]As stated by ‘Atiyah al-Libi, a Libyan al-Qaeda leader killed in August 2011, in a written document entitled “The Arab Revolutions and the Season of Harvest,” AQSL’s strategic goal in Libya is to foster “a real, radical, and revolutionary change that would affirm the supremacy of Allah’s words and the dominance of sharia.” 7[/quote]That was from a document from Atiyah al-Libi in 2011. The goals of all Ansar al-Sharia's is to implement Sharia. I also want to quote this: [quote]Al-Qaeda is trying to expand its appeal through the use of front organizations, such as Ansar al-Sharia. Al-Qaeda operatives have returned from Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen, Europe, and elsewhere to help constitute a Libyan branch of al-Qaeda. Although foreign jihadists and al-Qaeda members are likely present, senior Libyan operatives are probably in command of the al-Qaeda associated network nodes in Libya. Al-Qaeda will probably refrain from using the al-Qaeda name and may use other names, such as Ansar al-Sharia, or simply mujahideen[/quote] I also just want to highlight this: [quote] In such an environment, radical Islamist discourse can prosper, allowing al-Qaeda’s narrative to occupy a substantial space that AQSL is likely to exploit in order to pursue one of al-Qaeda’s earliest strategic objectives— creating a Libyan affiliate[/quote]Creating a Libyan affiliate has been a key goal of al-Qaeda, also since it's inception. A common analysis of ASL is that it's a simple [url=http://www.forbes.com/sites/marcbabej/2011/12/15/al-qaeda-rebranding-itself-to-boost-its-image/]rebranding[/url] of the al-Qaeda name to bolster it's image (also in the LOC link). It's not that hard to believe that al-Qaeda in Libya cares about it's public image since [url=http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/how-syrias-jihadists-win-friends-and-influence-people/278942/]al-Nusra does[/url] and so did [url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ap-al-qaeda-letter-found-outlining-mali-strategy/]AQIM in Mali[/url]. [url=http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2013/07/global_al_qaeda_affi.php]Let's also not forget that AQ affiliates are not automatons[/url]. I simply disagree with the notion that there is no proof they were not under the control of AQSL at the time of the attack. I just want to say that with al-Zawahiri, [url=http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2012/09/al_qaedas_plan_for_l.php]himself[/url], dispatching figures to Libya to help set up al-Qaeda's presence and network within Libya, it is hard for me to think that Ansar al-Sharia was not directed by AQSL since it began. I'm sorry. [quote]The attackers also deviated from the Al-Qaeda trademark of multiple simultaneous attacks involving large explosions.[/quote]I fail to see how this is relevant since al-Qaeda [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westgate_shopping_mall_attack]deviates[/url] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Amenas_hostage_crisis]all[/url] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Khobar_massacre]the time[/url]. Just because it wasn't an attack utilizing simultaneous bombings, or even a bombing for that matter, doesn't mean al-Qaeda is not behind it. [quote]Al-Qaeda is in love with bombs, whereas this was an attack involving technicals as the largest destructive device.[/quote]It doesn't have to be a bombing for it to be an al-Qaeda attack. They do much more than just bomb the shit out of things. As long as it meets their demands for their intentions and goals, they will do it. I just want to clarify that my main problem with this is the exclusion of several leads in this "investigation".