Libyan detained in attacks on U.S. consulate in Benghazi
Published: Thursday, March 14, 2013, 7:39 p.m.
TRIPOLI — Libyan authorities have detained a man investigators believe could be an important witness or suspect in the attacks on U.S. outposts in Benghazi in September, according to people familiar with the matter.
The man, a Libyan national identified as Faraj al-Chalabi, fled to Pakistan after the attacks and recently returned to Libya, said the sources, who include people in the United States and Libya close to the investigations. One Libyan security source said he was from Eastern Libya.
The U.S. government is aware of al-Chalabi's detention, and there are indications that American investigators may have been able to pose questions to him, according to the sources. It is not clear whether those questions were posed in person or through Libyan authorities.
Precisely what role the detained man may have played in the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks is unclear.
Sources in Washington said they did not believe he was a principal instigator or a front-line leader of the attacks on a poorly guarded, temporary diplomatic mission compound and a more fortified CIA compound nearby.
U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, two CIA security officers and another American diplomat were killed.
The FBI has been investigating, and its agents have visited Libya. So far, no individuals are known to be charged in connection with the attacks.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- North Korea purges Kim Jong Un’s powerful uncle
- South Korea ups air defense ante
- Central African leader says he lacks control of ex-allies
- South Africans of all races, backgrounds pray for Mandela
- India’s governing party trounced in state elections
- Egypt strikes a perilous repose
- Becoming extra wife is fantasy in Kazakhstan
- Thai protest leader vows to escalate offensive
- Autobahn toll plan attracts backlash
- Bolshoi dancer sentenced to prison
- 11-year-old pummels toddler