That's according to U.S.
Rep. Peter King, R-New York, who spoke to reporters after a closed
hearing in the House, which lasted an hour and 20 minutes.
King said Petraeus'
testimony differed from an earlier assessment the former CIA director
gave lawmakers just days after the September 11 attack, which left four
Americans dead, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens.
"He (Petraeus) ... stated
that he thought all along he made it clear that there was significant
terrorist involvement, and that is not my recollection of what he told
us on September 14," King said.
"The clear impression we
were given (in September) was that the overwhelming amount of evidence
was that it arose out of a spontaneous demonstration, and was not a
terrorist attack," he said.
U.S. officials initially
said the violence erupted spontaneously amid a large protest about a
privately made video produced in the United States that mocked the
Prophet Mohammed. The intelligence community later revised its
assessment, saying it believes the attack was a planned terrorist
assault.
King said that the word
spontaneous was minimized during Petraeus' testimony Friday, which was
given one week after he resigned from the CIA. Lawmakers said they
didn't ask him about why he left the agency. Petraeus has admitted an
extramarital affair with his biographer.
Critics of the administration have suggested that his resignation might be linked to fallout over the attack.
The Benghazi attack
became a political hot button during a presidential election year and
raised questions regarding issues such as security at the compound and
the Obama administration's initial description of the events.
King told reporters that he likes Petraeus and that it was uncomfortable, at times, to interview a man he considers a friend.
"He was a strong
soldier. Very professional, very knowledgeable, very strong," King said.
"He's a solid guy. I consider him a friend, which made the questioning
tough. You realize the human tragedy here."
After he spoke at the
House Intelligence hearing, Petraeus testified in front of the Senate
Intelligence Committee. He was ushered into both sessions without
reporters being able to get a camera shot of him, and after he testified
he left the premises, CNN learned.
Petraeus was not asked to testify under oath, King said.
King and other lawmakers said Petraeus testified that his resignation had nothing to do with the consulate attack.
That matches what
Petraeus told Kyra Phillips of HLN, CNN's sister network. He said his
resignation was solely a result of his extramarital affair with his
biographer, Paula Broadwell. He added that he never passed classified
information to her.
Prior to Friday's hearings, it was thought that Petraeus would tell lawmakers that the CIA knew soon after the attack that Ansar al Sharia
was responsible for it, according to an official with knowledge of the
case. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the
sensitivity of the subject matter.
Ansar al Sharia is more
of a label than an organization, one that's been adopted by conservative
Salafist groups across the Arab world.
It was not known whether Petraeus spoke specifically about Ansar al Sharia during Friday's sessions.
After the House committee hearing, Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, D-Maryland,
said the confusion over the consulate incident arose from there being
essentially two threads of violence: one caused by the protest, which
was chaotic, and a second that was orchestrated by terrorists, which was
highly coordinated.
There were "two
different types of situations at play," Ruppersberger said, explaining
that in the hours and days after the attack, it was naturally difficult
to clearly discern what happened.
Intelligence evolves, he
said, and new information comes out when agents obtain it. He played
down the idea that there was something untoward going on.
No comments:
Post a Comment