* Satellite photos were displayed showing site
* Base had tracked proliferation of looted weaponry
* Intelligence agencies dragged into political fray
By Mark Hosenball
WASHINGTON, Oct 12 (Reuters) – U.S. intelligence efforts in
Libya have suffered a significant setback due to the abandonment
and exposure of a facility in Benghazi, Libya identified by a
newspaper as a “CIA base” following a congressional hearing this
week, according to U.S. government sources.
The intelligence post, located 1.2 miles (2 km) from the
U.S. mission that was targeted by militants in a Sept. 11
attack, was evacuated of Americans after the assault that killed
Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Three other Americans died in
the attacks on U.S.-occupied buildings, including two who were
hit in a mortar blast at the secret compound.
The publication of satellite photos showing the site’s
location and layout have made it difficult, if not impossible,
for intelligence agencies to reoccupy the site, according to
government sources, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The post had been a base for, among other things, collecting
information on the proliferation of weaponry looted from Libyan
government arsenals, including surface-to-air missiles, the
sources said. Its security features, including some
fortifications, sensors and cameras, were more advanced than
those at rented villa where Stevens died, they said.
The sources said intelligence agencies will find other ways
to collect information in Libya in the aftermath of last year’s
toppling of long-time leader Muammar Gaddafi.
“Benghazi played a critical role in the emergence of the new
Libya and will continue to do so. It makes sense that we would
return there to continue to build relationships,” one U.S.
official said.
Public discussion of the top-secret location began with a
contentious Wednesday hearing of the House of Representatives
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which was
investigating whether security lapses put Americans at risk.
The State Department displayed a satellite photograph
showing two locations – the rented villa that served as a
special diplomatic mission and the compound that officials had
cryptically described as an “annex” or “safe house” for
diplomatic personnel.
Both compounds were attacked by militants believed to be
tied to al Qaeda. After the diplomatic complex was overrun, U.S.
and Libyan personnel rushed by car to the second site, where
they fought off two more waves of assaults, officials said.
Charlene Lamb, a top official in the State Department’s
Bureau of Diplomatic Security, told lawmakers that the secret
compound took “as many as three direct hits.”
Two U.S. security officials, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods,
were killed there in what U.S. officials described as an unlucky
mortar strike. As many as 37 people eventually escaped to
Benghazi’s airport.
When the satellite photo was displayed, a senior committee
Republican, Representative Jason Chaffetz, complained that the
discussion was drifting into “classified issues that deal with
sources and methods,” and the photo was removed from public
display. No one at the hearing used the term “CIA base” to
describe the facility.
‘BONEHEADED QUESTIONING’
The next morning, Dana Milbank, a Washington Post columnist,
wrote that the committee’s “boneheaded questioning” of State
Department witnesses left little doubt that the compound in the
pictures was a “CIA base.”
The Center for American Progress, a Washington think tank
with ties to the Obama White House, followed up with a blog post
accusing Republicans of revealing the “Location Of Secret CIA
Base.”
On Friday, Representative Dutch Ruppersberger, top Democrat
on the House Intelligence Committee, accused Republicans of
mishandling secret information.
Spokespeople for the State Department and White House had no
comment. The CIA also had no comment.
Oversight committee spokesman Frederick Hill said committee
Democrats made matters worse by asking questions about the
satellite photos. “Even after Republicans objected, Democrats
continued to ask questions that led State officials to put even
more sensitive information about who worked there into the
public realm,” Hill said.
The dispute over who was responsible for identifying the
base is the latest case in which intelligence agencies –
particularly the CIA – have been dragged into a political fray
over the Benghazi attack.
The Obama administration’s handling of the Benghazi attacks
has become fodder for criticism from Republican presidential
candidate Mitt Romney and running mate Paul Ryan ahead of the
Nov. 6 election.
Intelligence officials are not happy at being drawn into the
political battle. Paul Pillar, one of the CIA’s former most
senior analysts, said the agency is sure to be dismayed at how
its sensitive work has been dragged into the debate.
“They’re trying to do the best they can with fragmentary and
incomplete information. No doubt they are very unhappy that this
issue is now being exploited for political purposes,” Pillar
said.
