Top 10 revelations from Leon Panetta's new book 'Worthy Fights'

Leon Panetta's book, “Worthy Fights: a Memoir of Leadership in War and Peace,” comes out Tuesday.

8. Panetta rejected CIA view on Benghazi attack

Esam Al-Fetori/Reuters
A protester reacts as the US Consulate in Benghazi is seen in flames on Sept. 11, 2012.

Panetta and Petraeus differed in their assessment of the Benghazi attack. The initial intelligence reports provided to the president suggested that the attack in Benghazi was “the work of mob protesters rather than an organized assault.”

Petraeus, working with CIA analysts, had come to this conclusion and presented it in the White House situation room the day after the attack. 

“I questioned it from the beginning,” Panetta writes, “not because I had different information, but because it seemed to me that most spontaneous demonstrators don’t arrive for a protest carrying rocket-propelled grenade launchers.” 

Petraeus “defended the theory of his analysts, however, arguing that there was so much weaponry floating around Libya that it was plausible in this instance.”

That theory was made into talking points for the House Intelligence Committee. “Although they weren’t intended for use by UN ambassador Susan Rice, she used them during several interviews she gave that weekend,” undercutting the claim by some, Panetta argues, that the talking points “were specifically written for Rice so she could ‘mislead’ the country,” he adds. “To the contrary, it was the working premise of CIA analysts as of that time.

That “intelligence is difficult and often contradictory,” he adds “should surprise nobody.”

8 of 10

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.