prev
next
State Dept. to take hot seat over Libya security
Then U.S. envoy Christopher Stevens attends meetings at the Tibesty Hotel in Benghazi, Libya, April 11, 2011. / AP
Updated at 4:19 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON The first Congressional hearing to focus on the fatal attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi will be held by the House Oversight Committee this Wednesday. Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy will be the most senior U.S. official to testify before Congress's highest ranking investigative body.
He will appear at the State Department's behest alongside two individuals who were specifically requested by the Committee; Deputy Assistant Director for International Programs Charlene Lamb, and Eric Nordstrom, the former State Department Regional Security Officer for Libya. All three have been asked to testify by the Committee which is chaired by Representative Darrell Issa (R-Calif.).
Congress will begin to piece together the timeline of events that led up to the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. mission, which left U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three other American personnel dead. The testimony by Kennedy will be the first direct rebuttal of recent allegations made by House Oversight Committee Chairman Issa and other officials that the State Department ignored and denied requests for additional security in Libya.
Libya embassy staff told "to do with less"?
The most recent accusations come from Lt. Col. Andy Wood, the former head of a U.S. Special Forces "Site Security Team" in Libya, who tells CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson he and many other senior staff at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, "felt we needed more, not less" security personnel in the country, but were told "to do with less. For what reasons, I don't know."
State Department officials tell CBS News that Wood was not part of the security assessment in Benghazi and that he was stationed in Tripoli, and thus unfamiliar with the local situation in the east of the country. Wood, however, says some of the members of his own team and additional personnel from the State Department's elite security detail - two teams which left Libya in August - would have traveled to Benghazi with Ambassador Stevens had they still been in the country. He did not say how many additional security agents might have been deployed for the Ambassador's trip to the city, but he tells Attkisson that he has wondered if it might have made a difference on the night of the attack.
- Ex-team leader: State Dept. rejected security pleas
- Congress to probe security flaws for Libya diplomats
- Libya consulate: Was security added or taken away?
A key question that lawmakers will ask is whether the U.S. mission in Benghazi should even have been allowed to exist in a country where the central government does not have full control over internal security. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has addressed the security in Benghazi only twice in public remarks. When asked by CBS News whether the consulate had adequate security levels at the time of the attack, the secretary described the security detail as "robust."
She detailed the external security as consisting of a wall, and "a unit of host government security forces, as well as a local guard force."
While that description appears to be technically correct, media organizations including CBS News have reported that the host government security forces were not the typical government-provided army or presidential guard. Instead, the force in Libya was made up of members of a local militia known as the 17th of February Brigade. The relatively new, untested Libyan government entrusted security to the Brigade, and a handful of others like it in Benghazi, as the Qaddafi-era military and intelligence services had been disbanded and the well-armed groups had become the de facto police forces in the region.
In addition to the local militia, State contracted additional security services from a British firm called Blue Mountain, which employed Libyans to conduct procedural security measures inside the compound, including x-rays of equipment.
CBS News has learned that five Diplomatic Security agents were present at the Benghazi compound during the night of the attack. That included two agents who traveled with the Ambassador and three who were based in Benghazi. A State Department official tells CBS News that those numbers are "consistent" with the number of agents that were being requested by the mission leading up to the Sept 11, 2012 attack.
What remains unclear is how the five Diplomatic Security agents all became separated from Ambassador Stevens during the attack. A preliminary report shown to a senior government official suggests that some of the agents left the ambassador inside the compound in order to get heavier weaponry instead of the light arms that they were carrying.
The State Department has remained tight-lipped about what happened in Benghazi during the three weeks since the attack on the consulate, and has continued to cite the threat assessment conducted by the Director of National Intelligence which stated that there was, "no actionable intelligence that an attack on our post in Benghazi was planned or imminent."
The department says that it will not officially comment until the investigation conducted by the Accountability Review Board (ARB) is complete. The panel has met twice so far. In the interim, certain diplomatic security agents and other federal officials have come forward with accounts of requests for additional security that they claim were denied, including Lt. Col. Woods' assertions that he and Ambassador Stevens directly requested additional personnel to no avail.
Western security in Benghazi under scrutiny
A senior State Department official confirmed to CBS News that there were attacks in the Benghazi area in the months leading up to the Sept. 11 attack, but the official says six of those incidents - about half of those CBS News has been informed of - were of the "level and caliber" typical to a war zone in a place like Libya.
The official, who requested anonymity to speak on background, said the attack on the Benghazi Consulate was of a level of lethality the likes of which "no one can remember" happening at a U.S. mission since the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya in 1998.
Senior State Department aides have been working throughout the holiday weekend to sort through emails, cables and other communications before handing them over to congressional investigators. Thousands of documents will be sent to the Hill for review to determine who knew about the security situation in Benghazi.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the State Department is cooperating fully with the investigation. The Oversight Committee does hold the powers of subpoena, but State's agreement to comply means that those powers will not be invoked at this stage.
CBS News has learned that cameras mounted inside of the Benghazi compound recorded the assault. What isn't clear is whether the copy of that video remains in the possession of the U.S. State Department's Diplomatic Security team or in the hands of local Libyans who retrieved some of the cameras. That video, along with thousands of documents collected from senior aides to Clinton, will be reviewed by the congressional investigators.
Popular on CBSNews.com
- 1 winning ticket sold in Fla. on Powerball
- Powerball frenzy locks down most possible number combos
- Crash in small Va. town injures dozens during parade
- Authorities: N.Y. college student was killed by police 47 Comments
- The War in Chicago
- Seven-time lottery winner shares secret to winning Powerball
- Texas tornado survivors start to return home
- Official: Broken rail eyed in Conn. train crash
Most Popular
-
01
-
02
-
03
-
04
-
05
Most Shared
Most Discussed
"CAN WE BLAME THIS ON THE VIDEO - and not the Obama Policy failures?"
THAT was the question - that history will show caused Obama's Impeachment!
The State Department claims about half of the instances were small and insignificant. Ok, so what about the other 6 or seven incidences that were significant? Only one is needed.
We are going to find in this investigation that the State Department turned down requests for security because they wanted Libya to handle it.
The big question however will be how did the State Department handle evacuation requests on the day of attack. Any embassy can request immediate evacuation with one phone call. If that phone call was made, was it denied and referred to Libyan security forces?
The State Department claims about half of the instances were small and insignificant. Ok, so what about the other 6 or seven incidences that were significant? Only one is needed.
We are going to find in this investigation that the State Department turned down requests for security because they wanted Libya to handle it.
The big question however will be how did the State Department handle evacuation requests on the day of attack. Any embassy can request immediate evacuation with one phone call. If that phone call was made, was it denied and referred to Libyan security forces?
A Must Read
It's true. truthorfiction.com/rumors/d/DNC-BASKET-BAN.htm
Read it carefully - I was actually surprised by what it has to say!
by Rev. Austin Miles
CHARLOTTE, North Carolina
(9/11/12) When the DNC came to Charlotte, area churches, 100 of them, offered hospitality, not knowing how much the Dems hate God and would actually boo God at the convention. They had no idea how that hatred would be directed at them and their churches.
The Sunday before the DNC, over 9000 people had come together to pray for the convention. Then, wanting to extend hospitality to the visitors to their city, 56 of the churches set out to "Adopt-a-Delegation." They put together gift baskets featuring Carolina Pralines and a letter welcoming them to the city and offering assistance in transportation, childcare or spiritual matters.
According to writer, Todd Starnes, The DNC banned the churches from distributing the gift baskets to delegates because, DNC said, the congregations hold values that are contrary to the party platform. Read that carefully.
David Benham, one of the organizers of the outreach said, "We were just trying to display Southern hospitality." DNC officials, however, conveyed to city leaders that the Christians would not be allowed to present their gift baskets. Even the Charlotte Mayor's office jumped in to tell the churches not to participate, saying that their views on women's rights are contrary to the platform. That's right....the same platform that booed God later.
Benham then asked if they could send welcome letters to the delegates. Again, the DNC refused, because, they said, "The churches hold pro-life values."
The baskets did not contain a single political or pro-life message. They just wanted to give them regional candies and a welcome letter. The DNC refused to return numerous phone calls seeking comment. But it gets worse. When a gathering of 200 Muslims showed up to pray for the convention, the Dems welcomed them with open arms and the liberal media gave extensive national coverage.
It is ironic that this day, in the shadow of that Islamic prayer event, we commemorate the greatest tragedy in American History, when Muslims attacked America on September 11, 2001, brutally killing thousands of innocent people. Muslims who publicly state their hatred of our country with fierce determination to kill us all and put America under Sharia Law, are welcomed by the Democratic Party while Christians are pushed out of sight like criminals because they respect life and hold family values.
These are the same Democrats who want you to vote them into office to direct the United States of America and every life from beginning to end. It is obvious that we must not let this happen.
your redundant right wing whining about the MSM is pretty laughable looking at the top 3 headlines right here.
Dishonesty....without it right wingers would be left only with hypocrisy
Don't like yourself, eh?
In 1998, the U.S. Congress passed, and President Bill Clinton signed, the Iraq Liberation Act. That Act stated, "It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq, and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime." This legislation passed the House by a vote of 360 to 38, and it passed the Senate without a single vote in opposition.
Surely you don't believe that only the right was involved in that policy decision.