• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Who Altered the Benghazi Talking Points?

    Bipartisan outrage is a rarity in Washington these days, but the Obama Administration’s lack of transparency over Benghazi has provoked it.

    This $64,000 question occupied Congress in open and closed hearings last week as well as the Sunday talk shows: Who altered the Administration’s talking points on the Benghazi terrorist attack? Lawmakers of both parties—such as Diane Feinstein (D–CA) and Mike Rogers (R–MI), the two senior members of the Senate Intelligence Committee who both appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press—are demanding answers.

    The immediate target has been U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, who did not testify last week. The CIA talking points she was provided suggested that the attacks were caused by outrage over an anti-Muslim video and were not a systematically devised terrorist attack. Among the provided talking points were:

    • “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the US Embassy in Cairo.”
    • “This assessment may change as additional information is collected and analyzed and as currently available information continues to be evaluated.”
    • “The investigation is on-going, and the US Government is working with Libyan authorities to bring to justice those responsible for the deaths of US citizens.”

    Absent from the talking points is, of course, the word terrorism. Yet we know that U.S. intelligence officials knew within 24 hours of the attack that al-Qaeda was involved, so why would the CIA leave this information out of its talking points? With every new piece of information that has surfaced, more questions have been raised.

    What we have learned over the past five days is that the divisions between the White House and the CIA are deepening. Recently resigned CIA director David Petraeus refused to accept blame for leaving the word terrorism out of the talking points in his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee and states that it was there when the talking points left the CIA.

    Ben Rhodes, deputy national security adviser, has likewise refused to accept blame for excising it. Suspicion meanwhile has fallen on the National Security Council’s Deputies Committee, an interagency group of political appointees.

    Why is getting to the truth of the CIA talking points ultimately so important?

    We need to know if the Obama Administration deliberately misled the American people and Congress about a terrorist attack on Americans. It is important to know if the CIA understands what is going on in the Middle East. If its analysts confuse organized terrorists with random mobs, they are obviously not up to the job, and their threat assessments are way off.

    Posted in Featured [slideshow_deploy]

    4 Responses to Who Altered the Benghazi Talking Points?

    1. Pilgrim says:

      It is so obvious that the white House Staff did this to protect Obama and he is slippery as an eel to have gotten this far without the outrage of the American People. Mission accomplished. They were able to have the media ignore this travesty until after the election. What I am afraid of is that I do not trust this Administration with any information given to the American Public going forward.
      I dream of what America could have been if only Romney and Ryan were in charge!!!
      An O had the nerve to call George Bush "unpatriotic"!!!

    2. Bobbie says:

      Those who defend this woman's lies to America are racists, sexists and appear tiresome of their own ignorance costing America godless amounts!!!! Accountability comes from the responsibilities people take on! She took the responsibility to address America. She misled by lying in her address to America! She knows the protocol that took place! Hold her accountable! Someone knows the truth!

      The longer this goes on the more danger we're in. Get rid of the personal insecurities and the personally insecure and focus on the matters of this horrific terrorist attack that was 100% preventable under any administration!!!! There's no excuse but inhumane for this to have happened!!

    3. Bobbie says:

      These people show such dishonor to their positions and America(ns) expectations. They don't care what happened or that terrorists did it. They're too busy protecting themselves from their personally originated, coded definition game. Susan Rice and everybody with noticeable low self esteem and insecurities are unfit to serve America(ns.)

      Keep hearing these “code words.” What defense does anyone have when speaking English that people who take offense to words code them with offenses irrelevant to the word's meaning and act? “Incompetence” is the inability to give a straight answer that isn't a lie that only a mouth that talks and acts on their own accord can be liable to and for! It's also the inability to do the job and in this case what we the people expect at all levels beyond our control whom we pay to do the job with integrity, dignity and respect.

      Nobody knows "your" "code words" but "you the frail" that would think them up in the first place and use them against people who speak to all people all the same. Obviously unaware of your childish, little man game. Mature adults take the meaning of words for what they are without coding definitions to reflect insecurities that provoke YOUR self inflictions of hurt feelings for attention. You poor things holding yourselves back by creating a word game of offenses only known by the offended but insulting to many more to hold a word to a skin color!!?? And THAT WORD!!! ANY WORD!

      America isn't going to narrow her English vocabulary because you're unwilling to accept the common meanings to hide from your accountabilities. WOW! How low can you go? What have you done to yourselves and the minds of others?

      Stop this evil, selfish, heartlessness wasting precious time and money!


      There are people in places they shouldn't be who shows no genuine understanding of words that are necessary for all communicable measures is pure contempt with necessary steps down.

      Woooooop!! Turkey day! Guess guilt gets more vacation.

    4. Carol,AZ says:

      Under the new age hyperbole called " transparency" is the constant for the opposite.
      It's been utilized so affectively ,redressed, reshaped and called the "truth" by the new ruling class that what anyone refuses to state is , our Govt has no intentions of telling us the truth over this tragic situation.
      This will be another example of work place violence.
      Few people an handle the truth , that it's become unrecognizable. This administration has been built on, one lie after another.
      The tragic situation behind closed doors will be covered-up and a trade-off will be bartered until the next time.
      ..and Helle, if you're looking for the word "terrorism" to be utilized, as you correctly pointed out, our new ruling class has no intention of using it.
      Why? because they're clueless to understand what it is in the first place.Or haven't heard , it was a "flash mob."

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.