"Absolutely no one intentionally or unintentionally misled anybody involved in this," Mr. Gibbs said. “Nobody wants to get to the bottom of this more than the president and the secretary of State so that we can protect our missions and our consulates throughout the world and remain engaged.”
Nearly two weeks after the attack in Benghazi, it remains unclear what prompted it or the degree to which Al Qaeda or some other terrorist organization was involved.
Early on, the Obama administration said the protest against a crude US-made anti-Islam YouTube video “seems to have been hijacked … by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons," as UN Ambassador Susan Rice said last Sunday. In other words, it wasn’t a coordinated, pre-planned attack but something more spontaneous for which there was no “actionable intelligence,” as Ambassador Rice put it, that might have alerted officials able to protect against it.
Since then, White House officials have acknowledged that it was a sophisticated “terrorist attack.” Meanwhile, news reports have suggested that there was no video-related anti-US protest before the armed attack that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and the three other men.
"I have seen no information that shows that there was a protest going on as you have seen around any other embassy at the time," Rep. Mike Rogers said on CNN Sunday. "It was clearly designed to be an attack."
Concern about security in Benghazi is at the heart of a controversy over CNN’s reporting information it found in Mr. Stevens’s journal several days after he was killed.