Petraeus says CIA blamed terrorists
■ Testifies on Libya attack
David Petraeus, the former CIA director, told lawmakers Friday that classified intelligence reports revealed the deadly assault on the U. S. diplomatic mission in Libya was a terrorist attack, but that the administration refrained from saying it suspected that the perpetrators of the attack were al- Qaida affiliates and sympathizers to avoid tipping off the groups.
Petraeus, who resigned last week after admitting to an extramarital affair, said the names of groups suspected in the attack — including al- Qaida’s franchise in North Africa
and a local Libyan group, Ansar al-Shariah — were removed from the public explanation of the attack immediately after the assault to avoid alerting the militants that U. S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies were tracking them, lawmakers said.
In his first public appearance since he resigned last week, Petraeus testified before the House and Senate intelligence committees in back-to-back, closed-door hearings as lawmakers from both parties continued to wrestle with questions about the Obama administration’s handling of the Sept. 11 attacks in Benghazi that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans and why its public portrayal conflicted with the intelligence agencies’ classified assessments.
“They knew right away that there were terrorists involved in the operation,” said Rep. C.A. Ruppersberger of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.
During his testimony, Petraeus expressed regret for his affair. Lawmakers did not ask him about it. In addition to what the administration knew about assailants, they focused their questions on possible security lapses at the diplomatic compound in Benghazi, particularly given a spate of attacks this year in Benghazi against the U.S. mission, the British ambassador’s convoy and the Red Cross.
But many of the questions dealt with how the intelligence services and the administration overall responded to a request from the House committee for unclassified talking points about what happened, in advance of a closed briefing by Petraeus on Sept. 14, three days after the attack.
The issue took on added resonance after Republicans criticized the ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, for suggesting on Sunday talk shows five days after the assault that the siege in Benghazi was a spontaneous protest rather than an opportunistic terrorist attack.
Democrats leapt to Rice’s defense Friday, saying she was simply following the unclassified talking points provided to her.
“I really think Ambassador Rice is being treated unfairly,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D- Calif., who leads the Intelligence Committee.
The talking points initially drafted by the CIA attributed the attack to fighters with al- Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb, the organization’s North Africa franchise, and Ansar al-Shariah, a Libyan group, some of whose members have al-Qaida ties.
Petraeus and other top CIA officials signed off on the draft and then circulated it to other intelligence agencies and the State Department and National Security Council.
At some point — Petraeus told lawmakers he was not sure where — objections were raised to naming the groups and the less specific word “extremists” was substituted.
“The fact is, the reference to al-Qaida was taken out somewhere along the line by someone outside the intelligence community,” Rep. Peter King, RN.Y., said after the House hearing. “We need to find out who did it and why.”