Letters obtained exclusively by Fox News appear to show the State Department refused to get involved when the company tasked with protecting the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, raised security concerns, the latest indication that warning signs may have been ignored in the lead-up to last month's terror attack.
The letters pertain to a dispute between Blue Mountain Libya, the security license holder in Libya, and its operations partner Blue Mountain UK, which trained and provided the local guards.
A source with knowledge of two State Department meetings -- one in June and a second in July -- told Fox News that Blue Mountain Libya felt the security provided by the UK partner was "substandard and the situation was unworkable."
But according to the source, when the Libyans tried to bring in a third party -- an American contractor -- to improve security, a State Department contract officer declined to get involved.
"The U.S. government is not required to mediate any disagreements between the two parties of the Blue Mountain Libya partnership," contracting officer Jan Visintainer wrote on July 10 to Blue Mountain Libya, adding that to date "contract performance is satisfactory."
. . .
The letter to Clinton alleges 13 incidents that showed the deteriorating security situation on the ground -- one of which included workers with Blue Mountain. Weeks before the attack, the letter said, Libyan guards employed by the Blue Mountain Group were urged by their family members to quit over rumors "of an impending attack."
The letter included other incidents, which have been well documented, including the June attack on a convoy carrying the British ambassador. And it said "assailants" put an explosive device at the gate of the U.S. Consulate in early June, blowing a hole in the security perimeter.
The State Department, meanwhile, has stood by U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice in the face of criticism and calls for her resignation. Rice came under fire for claiming repeatedly the Sunday after the attack that it was a "spontaneous" reaction to protests over an anti-Islam film. The administration now acknowledges the assault was a coordinated terror attack.

There was something off-kilter about the tragic saga of Christopher Stevens from the beginning. Even for a highly regarded ambassador with a dash of Lawrence of Arabia’s empathy and mistaken sense of invulnerability, Stevens was obviously too lightly guarded in a region roiling with threats and hatred; he was in a susceptible complex without enough armed security and basic emergency equipment. Even afterward, the place was so unprotected that a CNN staffer could walk in and pick up Stevens’s private diary, which reflected the ambassador’s fear about never-ending attacks and being on an Al Qaeda hit list.

There were, after all, Al Qaeda sympathizers among the rebels who overthrew Muammar el-Qaddafi with American help.

House Republicans will hold a hearing next week and have asked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to explain why the consulate was not better defended given, as Representative Darrell Issa noted in a letter, the “long line of attacks on Western diplomats and officials in Libya in the months leading up to September 11, 2012.”

Susan Rice’s tumble is part of a disturbing pattern of rushing to pump up the president on national security, which seems particularly stupid because it’s so unnecessary.

Last year, the White House had to backtrack from the overwrought initial contentions of John Brennan, a deputy national security adviser, who said Bin Laden died after resisting in a firefight and that he was “hiding behind women who were put in front of him as a shield.”

Now that one of the members of the Navy SEAL team, Matt Bissonette, has written a book, there are contradictory accounts, one by a Democratic White House dying to sound tough, and one by an eyewitness. Bissonette wrote that the lead commando shot an unarmed Bin Laden in the head when he peered out of his bedroom door and they shot his convulsing body again inside the bedroom. In the administration’s version, the shot in the stairwell missed.

Just so, in an overzealous effort to burnish a president who did not need burnishing — especially against foreign policy bumbler Mitt Romney and foreign policy novice Paul Ryan — they have gotten tangled in contradictory accounts about Benghazi. The administration had benefited from the impression that it had diminished Al Qaeda, even though the public no doubt appreciates that it was never going to be so simple. But, as Romney learned when he prematurely rushed to the microphone to take advantage of the crisis and mangled his facts, there is a cost to letting the political spin cycle dictate how you discuss national security.

The U.S. military is preparing to retaliate for the Libyan attack. But, even if Stevens is avenged, will the president get the credit he deserves if his acolytes have left the impression that they’re willing to rewrite the story for political advantage?

In the six months leading up to the assault on the United States consulate in Benghazi, the State Department reduced the number of trained Americans guarding U.S. facilities in Libya, according to a leading House Republican investigating the Sept. 11 anniversary attacks. The reduction in U.S. security personnel increased America’s reliance on local Libyan guards for the protection of its diplomats.

This is the latest charge from Rep. Jason Chaffetz, the Utah Republican leading a House investigation on the Benghazi attacks, regarding alleged security defects in Benghazi. Chaffetz said the information comes from whistleblowers who have approached the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

The State Department on Wednesday didn’t respond to requests for comment. However, a senior State Department official said an independent review panel was examining the charge. This official said it was routine to reduce the number of U.S. personnel serving in new diplomatic posts such as Benghazi over time. When the U.S. established its official presence in Benghazi in 2011, it was the middle of a war, and even routine jobs such as drivers were handled by U.S. personnel, this official said.

The allegation from Chaffetz, who is the chairman of the oversight committee’s subcommittee that handles national security, is important in light of recent reports that some Libyans who provided security for U.S. missions were working with insurgents and, in one case, allegedly attacked the consulate in Benghazi in April with a homemade explosive.

On Tuesday, Chaffetz and the oversight committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), disclosed in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton details of an alleged April 6 bombing at the consulate. The letter detailed how in the run-up to the 9-11 assault there was an escalation of military-style attacks on Western targets in Libya’s second-largest city. The letter also said U.S. security personnel had requested, and were denied, additional security for the U.S. embassy in Tripoli and the consulate in Benghazi.

An Egyptian protester runs toward riot police holding a live tear gas canister during clashes near the United States Embassy and Cairo's Tahrir Square on September 13, 2012 in Cairo, Egypt. Demonstrations turned violent late Wednesday night near the US Embassy, after Egyptians demonstrated at the Embassy compound and breached its perimeter walls on Tuesday. Christopher Stevens, a State Department officer at the consulate in the Libyan city of Benghazi, died in an a later attack along with three other embassy staff after violence erupted over the film. (Ed Giles / Getty Images)

Chaffetz went further Wednesday, saying in an interview that the number of American diplomatic security officers serving in Libya had been reduced in the six months prior to the attacks. "The fully trained Americans who can deal with a volatile situation were reduced in the six months leading up to the attacks," he said. "When you combine that with the lack of commitment to fortifying the physical facilities, you see a pattern.”

Amid a growing diplomatic mandate after the revolution and increased concerns about an "uncertain and unstable" security environment, the U.S. Embassy staff in Libya requested a 16-member Special Operations "security support team" remain in the country for several months beyond the end of its scheduled departure in August, calling its work "essential," according to a State Department memo obtained by CNN Security Clearance.

The request was denied.

"Given the unstable security environment, projected staffing increases, lack of physical and technical security upgrades in place and continued high volume of VIP visits, Embassy Tripoli requests an extension" of the security support team for four months, which "will allow us to implement the security transition plans recommended by the Department," reads the February 28 document.

"A loss of SST now would severely and negatively impact our ability to achieve the department's policy and management objectives at this critical time in Libya's transition," it said.

The memo, drafted by Deputy Chief of Mission Joan Polaschik, is being examined by a House Committee questioning whether there was adequate security for U.S. diplomats and missions before Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others Americans were killed in an attack on the U.S. diplomatic office in Benghazi on September 11.

CBS News Foreign Correspondent Lara Logan, who was sexually assaulted in Egypt during the Arab Spring and overthrowing of then President Hosni Mubarak, shredded the Obama administration and Islamist "apologists" in a recent speech for claims Al Qaeda is weakened. Logan made clear the War on Terror isn't in a downslide and said Islamists are as strong as ever with a willingness to attack Americans.

Eleven years later, “they” still hate us, now more than ever, Logan told the crowd. The Taliban and al-Qaida have not been vanquished, she added. They’re coming back.

“I chose this subject because, one, I can’t stand, that there is a major lie being propagated . . .” Logan declared in her native South African accent.

The lie is that America’s military might has tamed the Taliban.

There is this narrative coming out of Washington for the last two years,” Logan said. It is driven in part by “Taliban apologists,” who claim “they are just the poor moderate, gentler, kinder Taliban,” she added sarcastically. “It’s such nonsense!”

Logan stepped way out of the “objective,” journalistic role. The audience was riveted as she told of plowing through reams of documents, and interviewing John Allen, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan; Afghan President Hamid Karzai, and a Taliban commander trained by al-Qaida. The Taliban and al-Qaida are teaming up and recruiting new terrorists to do us deadly harm, she reports.

She made a passionate case that our government is downplaying the strength of our enemies in Afghanistan and Pakistan, as a rationale of getting us out of the longest war. We have been lulled into believing that the perils are in the past: “You’re not listening to what the people who are fighting you say about this fight. In your arrogance, you think you write the script.”

Logan also touched on Libya and the recent killing of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

Logan even called for retribution for the recent terrorist killings of Christopher Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, and three other officials. The event is a harbinger of our vulnerability, she said. Logan hopes that America will “exact revenge and let the world know that the United States will not be attacked on its own soil. That its ambassadors will not be murdered, and that the United States will not stand by and do nothing about it.”

Marine Security Guards
U.S. Marines help DS protect information by serving as Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at more than 120 U.S. diplomatic missions. Under the management of the regional security officer, the DS special agent responsible for all security matters at each diplomatic mission, MSGs handle internal security.

Standing guard at Post 1, MSGs monitor surveillance devices, fire alarms, and communications systems that cover the entire embassy. They safeguard classified information and, as part of their daily routine, conduct inspections where classified information and equipment is stored or used. While primary protection of the embassy is the job of the host government, in the form of guards, should an embassy be attacked and that protection fail, the MSGs'mission is to delay any hostile group long enough to destroy classified material and aid in safeguarding the lives of diplomatic personnel. MSGs also assist in evacuating embassy personnel and other Americans living in the country should that be necessary.

Marines have played an important role in American diplomacy since 1798.

Rudewalrus wrote:I'm responding to the tone of his comment (I know, not generally a good idea - that's a prescription for letting a resonable debate spin out of countrol). Dr. Fate was responding to Danivon; full context below:

"danivon wrote:
Hang on, they knew of a threat at the time it was going on but information was (obviously) confused, and they didn't just 'send in the Marines', like Marines are always the cure for everything, and there are loads of disposable Marines to send into hotspots at a moment's notice...

[Dr. Fate]
No, they typically secure our embassies/consulates."

It seemed to me he was implying that the Marines are indeed usually there and capable of making an effective response. Minor point; I should have held my tongue. Mea culpa.

And No, I would not describe Libya as 'normal;' hence my comment on it being resonable to discuss whether or not there was sufficient security.

Marine Security Guards are responsible for providing security at about 125 U.S. embassies and consulates around the world. Those on MSG duty are primarily responsible for embassies' interior security, normally the lobby or main entrance. Guards are trained to react to terrorist acts as well as a variety of emergencies such as fires, riots, demonstrations and evacuations.

Neal Anderth wrote:I don't think there would have been any meaningful political fallout if the administration had from the beginning been forthright about what had occurred, it was after all a consulate in Libya, and short of someone having the genius to make it a defensive fortification, this was going to happen.

I think these people get so use to spinning and twisting everything that they fail to stop themselves and ask if it's necessary.