Obama team explains shifting story on Libya attack

USATODAY

The Obama administration is trying to explain how statements about the attack Sept. 11 in Libya shifted from a spontaneous protest to a pre-planned terrorist attack.

The reason, officials say: new evidence.

"As the intelligence community collects and analyzes more information related to the attack, our understanding of the event continues to evolve," says a statement released late Friday by the office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI).

The changing story -- from a protest over an anti-Islam film to an organized attack possibly involving al-Qaeda -- has prompted Republican critics to accuse the Obama administration of a coverup of the facts behind the attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has called for the resignation of President Obama's ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice, saying "the fact is she gave out information which was either intentionally or unintentionally misleading and wrong, and there should be consequences for that."

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., defended Rice and her colleagues, saying "everyone who cares about the four fallen Americans in Benghazi would do well to take a deep breath."

The DNI statement said initial evidence did indicate that the killings in Benghazi resulted from protests outside the U.S. Consulate.

"In the immediate aftermath, there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo," the statement said. "We provided that initial assessment to Executive Branch officials and members of Congress, who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available."

The statement added: "Throughout our investigation we continued to emphasize that information gathered was preliminary and evolving."

Although the assessment was revived with the new evidence, the DNI said, a lot remains unknown about the attack:

"As we learned more about the attack, we revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists.

It remains unclear if any group or person exercised overall command and control of the attack, and if extremist group leaders directed their members to participate. However, we do assess that some of those involved were linked to groups affiliated with, or sympathetic to al-Qaeda.

We continue to make progress, but there remain many unanswered questions. As more information becomes available our analysis will continue to evolve and we will obtain a more complete understanding of the circumstances surrounding the terrorist attack."