Republicans hammer State witnesses on Libya attack

WASHINGTON (AP) - Four weeks before the election, Republicans used a politically charged House hearing to confront State Department officials about security at the U.S. consulate in Libya and assail the Obama administration's early response to the killing of the ambassador and three other Americans there.
GOP lawmakers refused to accept the department's explanation Wednesday that protection judged adequate for the threat was overwhelmed by an unprecedented assault in Benghazi on the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
They also rejected Under Secretary of State Patrick Kennedy's explanation that officials were relying on the best intelligence available in characterizing the attack afterward as stemming from a protest over an anti-Islam Internet video rather than a deliberate, planned act of terrorism.
A top State official acknowledged she had declined to approve more U.S. security as violence in Benghazi spiked, saying the department wanted to train Libyans to protect the consulate.
"I made the best decisions I could with the information I had," said Charlene R. Lamb, a deputy assistant secretary for diplomatic security.
Regardless of allegations of blame, there is no dispute over the tragic result. U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans - including two former Navy SEALs - were killed in what administration officials now describe as an act of terrorism.
In statements immediately after the attack, neither President Barack Obama nor Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton mentioned terrorism. And both gave credence to the notion that the attack was related to protests about the privately made anti-Islam video.
"Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet," Clinton said on the night of the attack. "The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind."
Five days later, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice said her best information at the time was that the attack stemmed from a protest that became violent.
White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters Wednesday that in hindsight "there is no question that the security was not enough to prevent that tragedy from happening. There were four Americans killed."
Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee tried to blame Republicans for cutting more than $300 million in diplomatic security funds worldwide.
"The fact is that, since 2011, the House has cut embassy security by hundreds of millions of dollars below the amounts requested by the president," said Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, the committee's senior Democrat.
Lamb, the official in charge of protecting U.S. embassies and consulates, told the committee, "We had the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time of 9/11."
Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., asked Lamb if she turned down requests for more security in Benghazi.
"Yes sir, I said personally I would not support it," she replied. "We were training local Libyans and army men" to provide security, a policy in force at U.S. diplomatic facilities around the world.
Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., retorted there was "as much as 30 percent turnover in the people you were training."
Eric Nordstrom, who was the top security official in Libya earlier this year, testified he was criticized for seeking more security. "There was no plan and it was hoped it would get better," he said.
Nordstrom told the committee that conversations he had with people in Washington led him to believe that it was "abundantly clear we were not going to get resources until the aftermath of an incident. How thin does the ice have to get before someone falls through?"
He said he was so exasperated at one point he told a colleague that "for me the Taliban is on the inside of the building."
Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, who headed a 16-member military force in Libya, disputed State Department officials who said the special operations troops were replaced by people with the same skill sets.
The skills of his troops were "way above the skill level of local (forces) armed with a pistol," Wood said, adding he was he was frustrated that pleas for more security were not met.
"We were fighting a losing battle, we weren't even allowed to keep what we had," he testified.
Nordstrom acknowledged in response to a question from Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, that while the State Department was refusing more security, his and others' pay was increased because he was serving in such a dangerous area.
Kennedy defended Rice for her comments indicating the attack was a protest gone awry.
"If any administration official, including any career official, were on television on Sunday, Sept. 16, they would have said what Ambassador Rice said," he said. "The information she had at that point from the intelligence community is the same that I had at that point. As time went on, additional information became available. Clearly, we know more today than we did on the Sunday after the attack."
Kennedy, a four-decade veteran of the Foreign Service, said the department uses the best information from people on the ground at diplomatic posts around the world as well as experts in Washington in assessing risk and allocating security resources.
"The assault that occurred on the evening of Sept. 11, however, was an unprecedented attack by dozens of heavily armed men," he said.
Meanwhile, Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, met Wednesday with Libyan President Mohamed Magariaf and other officials in Tripoli on ways Libya can better help the U.S. track down those responsible for the deaths at the consulate.
GOP lawmakers refused to accept the department's explanation Wednesday that protection judged adequate for the threat was overwhelmed by an unprecedented assault in Benghazi on the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
They also rejected Under Secretary of State Patrick Kennedy's explanation that officials were relying on the best intelligence available in characterizing the attack afterward as stemming from a protest over an anti-Islam Internet video rather than a deliberate, planned act of terrorism.
A top State official acknowledged she had declined to approve more U.S. security as violence in Benghazi spiked, saying the department wanted to train Libyans to protect the consulate.
"I made the best decisions I could with the information I had," said Charlene R. Lamb, a deputy assistant secretary for diplomatic security.
Regardless of allegations of blame, there is no dispute over the tragic result. U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans - including two former Navy SEALs - were killed in what administration officials now describe as an act of terrorism.
In statements immediately after the attack, neither President Barack Obama nor Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton mentioned terrorism. And both gave credence to the notion that the attack was related to protests about the privately made anti-Islam video.
"Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet," Clinton said on the night of the attack. "The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind."
Five days later, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice said her best information at the time was that the attack stemmed from a protest that became violent.
White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters Wednesday that in hindsight "there is no question that the security was not enough to prevent that tragedy from happening. There were four Americans killed."
Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee tried to blame Republicans for cutting more than $300 million in diplomatic security funds worldwide.
"The fact is that, since 2011, the House has cut embassy security by hundreds of millions of dollars below the amounts requested by the president," said Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, the committee's senior Democrat.
Lamb, the official in charge of protecting U.S. embassies and consulates, told the committee, "We had the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time of 9/11."
Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., asked Lamb if she turned down requests for more security in Benghazi.
"Yes sir, I said personally I would not support it," she replied. "We were training local Libyans and army men" to provide security, a policy in force at U.S. diplomatic facilities around the world.
Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., retorted there was "as much as 30 percent turnover in the people you were training."
Eric Nordstrom, who was the top security official in Libya earlier this year, testified he was criticized for seeking more security. "There was no plan and it was hoped it would get better," he said.
Nordstrom told the committee that conversations he had with people in Washington led him to believe that it was "abundantly clear we were not going to get resources until the aftermath of an incident. How thin does the ice have to get before someone falls through?"
He said he was so exasperated at one point he told a colleague that "for me the Taliban is on the inside of the building."
Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, who headed a 16-member military force in Libya, disputed State Department officials who said the special operations troops were replaced by people with the same skill sets.
The skills of his troops were "way above the skill level of local (forces) armed with a pistol," Wood said, adding he was he was frustrated that pleas for more security were not met.
"We were fighting a losing battle, we weren't even allowed to keep what we had," he testified.
Nordstrom acknowledged in response to a question from Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, that while the State Department was refusing more security, his and others' pay was increased because he was serving in such a dangerous area.
Kennedy defended Rice for her comments indicating the attack was a protest gone awry.
"If any administration official, including any career official, were on television on Sunday, Sept. 16, they would have said what Ambassador Rice said," he said. "The information she had at that point from the intelligence community is the same that I had at that point. As time went on, additional information became available. Clearly, we know more today than we did on the Sunday after the attack."
Kennedy, a four-decade veteran of the Foreign Service, said the department uses the best information from people on the ground at diplomatic posts around the world as well as experts in Washington in assessing risk and allocating security resources.
"The assault that occurred on the evening of Sept. 11, however, was an unprecedented attack by dozens of heavily armed men," he said.
Meanwhile, Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, met Wednesday with Libyan President Mohamed Magariaf and other officials in Tripoli on ways Libya can better help the U.S. track down those responsible for the deaths at the consulate.
Anything for a buck say the dome heads
"If any administration official, including any career official, were on television on Sunday, Sept. 16, they would have said what Ambassador Rice said," he said. "The information she had at that point from the intelligence community is the same that I had at that point. As time went on, additional information became available. Clearly, we know more today than we did on the Sunday after the attack."
Â
Heard this before...back on the original 9/11 attacks. As time goes on, real information comes in, instead of someone's opinions. The problem with the intelligence community is that when something bad happens, someone has to make up a story so they can get "information" out as quickly as possible, while at the same time disseminating what really went down.
Â
I don't really blame Rice, but I do blame Clinton for the lack of security over there in Libya. She had info, yet she refused to move on it. Thus, Obama couldn't move on it. If they had the twinges of something about to erupt, they should have pulled out all of the embassy staff immediately, and then go back in. Better safe than sorry.
Couldn't help but notice that at this hour [7am Thurs.] the usual Obama supporters on the blog are absent. If it's due to their realization that Obama has been lying and intentionally hiding the facts and covering up for his inept ability and deliberate denial that Al Qaeda is as strong as ever, and that Al Qaeda terrorists continue to maintain a dangerous threat to America and Americans abroad, then I understand why they aren't supporting Obama.
Â
Romney was correct in his assessment of the terrorist attack on our embassy. Obama owes Romney and America a public apology. Now.Â
26
Â
 @last boyscout I've noticed that as well. Cptmac and sargerator et. al. are nowhere to be found lately. The only one on here lately has been wahoo using his typical hate filled name calling posts. Someday he may learn that when you resort to name calling, no one will take you seriously, but then again, he/she may never learn.Â
This comment has been deleted
 @wahoo  @last When will you learn that when you resort to name calling no one will take you seriously?
 @last boyscout It wasn't a big leap for Romney to figure it was Al Queda when you realize that Obama policy has been to arm Al Queda in Libya, Syria, and Egypt. Obama is arming our enemy. Liberals love this. Liberals despise this country.
More liberal think
Â
Bad intel under Bush: "Bush lied, people died"
Â
Bad intel under Obama: "just a bump in the road " "That doesn't mean it was falseâ"
This comment has been deleted
 @wahoo , the Blame Bush basher, spews forth the DNC talking point:
" ah, yeah remember 9/11, it happened on cheney/bush watch......"
Â
So did Bush and the State Department also blame the twin towers on a cheesy Video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xEoHWLX0Dts
Â
Did Bush tell the world that it was just a "spontaneous mob violence"
or not have the balls to call it a TERRORIST attack!?!
Â
Was that Cheney who said "We weren't told they wanted more security. We did not know they wanted more security there," one day after a congressional hearing contradicting the blatant lie?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9PpK-S6IpI
Â
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/10/10/lamb_to_the_slaughter
Read it and weep:
http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/7-9-12-Memo.pdf
Â
You forgot to add racist to your Blame Bush head game.
Â
Apologist for misconduct and treason from the Obama admin just makes you an enabler of said crimes.
Â
Â
It was just yesterday that KATU was still reporting that the video was the cause of the attack. No reasonable person believed that from the beginning, but it's important to maintain the narrative for the obamabots in Portland.
Â
Our own Lincoln Graves is with The smartest Prez eva!
Â
Lincoln: Did you know that Mitt Romney was a Mormon?
Obama: Look, I don't want to comment on Romney''s Satanist beliefs.
Lincoln: You're so dreamy, I'm not gay, but damn! You're cute!
Obama: I've loved many men.
Lincoln: Was it wrong of Romney to comment on your lies about Libya?
Obama: I think Vanilla is my favorite flavor of Ice cream.
Lincoln: Amazing answer Jesus....er...smartest Prez eva!
Â
Lincoln: There you have it Carl. The security failures in Libya and the lies and coverup by Smartest Prev Eva! are the fault of Mitt Romney.
Â
Â
The President of the Untied States, just lied to the people that employ him and perpetuated that lie for a week just to make his sorry arse look better before the election. His job performance is up for review in a few weeks. Come on America let's put this guy on the unemployment line!
The real question is why hasn't the media, and this journalist in particular, asked any real sustained questions on this front? Our flipping embassy was torched and Americans were killed. Wake up media, save yourselves from this sinking ship that is Obama. Stop covering for him. What does he have to do before you wake up and do your job? Romney is the only one who got this right and he got massacred for it by the media. Journalists, do your job, be ethical, protect our democracy! We can and will lose it if you keep laying down cover fire for this guy.
Why do we even need diplomatic relations with countries that don't like us for religious or other reasons? For some countries we just need to have a strong deterrent ready and available. If we can't afford it, or we lack the stomach for it, then we should just leave them to stew in their own juices. Also, we don't need to give them foreign aid as bribery to stay nice to us!
"...officials were relying on the best intelligence available..."Â Good one! Now are they going to put up a banner that reads, "Mission Accomplished'? Maybe B'Ho could could publically congratulate Ms. Rice with a "Good job, Susie!"
Â
Let the coverup commence!
Well no shi* Sherlock!  Only Obama wanted to directly link the attack to a video to protect him from the truth. Obama is a total failure as far as his foreign policy (or lack of) is concerned. This is now proof that Obama, Mrs. Clinton and the rest of the Obama regime has lied day after day to the American public. Everyone else now knows what the rest of us new all along, that this was a well planed Muslim Terrorist attack. Â
 @last boyscout Obama's idea of good foreign policy is bowing to foreign leaders and apologizing to them for our actions....especially the Muslims that he panders to.
 @shek069 You've got that right.
 @last boyscout  @shek069 As Ms. Clinton should well know, "If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas."
Hammered? They should be fired and charged.  The people on the ground told the government that security was poor and getting worse. They asked for more security and got less. Then when they are murdered, our duck and cover president lies about what happens. Pathetic; hardly worthy of a Commander In Chief.
 @Scotty9 Another reason to vote for Romney. The list keeps growing and growing.
I watched about an hour and a half of the hearings on C-SPAN this morning.The bigger story here should have been the pathetic way the Democrats tried to constantly change the subject and deflect attention away from those in charge who dropped the ball, assign blame to a Republican lack of funding,compare this"tragedy" to the number of diplomats injured or killed during the Reagan administration,and just shift focus to the memories and "sacrifices" the heroic men and women who work in dangerous foreign regions make each day.
 @angry1 Blaming the Republicans.....it's the Democrat way of life. It's never their fault....just ask them.
"The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others." - Clinton
Unless, of course that religion is Christianity - then those efforts are funded by US taxpayers and are classified as "art".
Oh, as long as the Left does it, it's okay, right?
And the Democrats blame Bush and the intelligence (or lack of) that took us into Iraq. Pot meet Kettle.....
This comment has been deleted
 @wahoo Typical liberal name calling.....time to start singing a new tune.
Terrorist attack or not, the current administration lied about it. They said it was due to an anti-Muslim film when they knew all along it was an planned, orchestrated attack and yet they did NOTHING about it, even when the people in the embassy asked for increased security. EPIC FAIL on the Obama administration....AGAIN!!!!