Clinton pins hopes on internal review to answer mounting questions on what went wrong in Libya

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton responded to mounting questions Wednesday about what went wrong in Libya and who's responsible by asking for more time to complete an internal review, saying, "nobody will hold this department more accountable than we hold ourselves." 

The secretary vowed to get to the bottom of the terror attack that killed four Americans last month in response to a letter by Reps. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, claiming the department turned down requests for more security amid a string of attacks and threats in the lead-up to the Sept. 11 strike. 

"No one wants to determine what happened that night in Benghazi more than the president and I do. No one is more committed to ensuring it doesn't happen again, and nobody will hold this department more accountable than we hold ourselves because we serve with and we knew the four men we lost," Clinton said Wednesday. She did not address the lawmakers' specific allegations. 

As Clinton assured lawmakers that a newly formed "Accountability Review Board" will be getting on the case this week, a U.S. official also confirmed to Fox News that the administration is tracking suspects, though the official could not speculate on what action -- such as drone strikes -- the U.S. could take inside Libya's borders. 

The official claimed some of the militants involved were killed during the Sept. 11 firefight at the U.S. compound in Benghazi. 

Despite the movement, there is still no confirmation that FBI agents dispatched to Libya have arrived in Benghazi. 

And Chaffetz expressed concern that the State Department's findings would be pushed off until "after the election." 

"There are clear signs that (there were) security concerns in Libya and other embassies around the world, and what they were doing is diminishing security in the name of normalizing relations," Chaffetz told Fox News. 

Issa and Chaffetz detailed several attacks in Benghazi in the lead-up to the strike that they suggested should have been warning signs. 

Further, they claimed sources told them that diplomats made "repeated requests" for additional security but were denied. 

New signs also were emerging this week that officials were receiving guidance that the attack was coordinated in the immediate aftermath of the strike despite public comments to the contrary. 

The New York Times, which first reported that the U.S. was tracking suspects, reported that, according to one official, spy agencies were intercepting communications from militant Ansar al-Shariah fighters boasting to someone with an Al Qaeda affiliate. 

Reuters also reported that the Obama administration had "about a dozen" intelligence reports within hours of the attack suggesting Al Qaeda-tied militants were involved. 

Fox News reported last week that intelligence officials were picking up that it was a terror strike within 24 hours. 

Still, top administration officials in the week after the attack insisted it was a "spontaneous" reaction to protests over an anti-Islam film. That film was driving demonstrations across the Middle East and North Africa, but lawmakers and others were saying from the start that Libya was a different situation despite the initial claims of the Obama administration. 

Letters obtained exclusively by Fox News also 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 letters pertained 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. 

Asked about that letter Tuesday, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said the department's investigation likely would address the issue. 

Fox News' Ed Henry and Catherine Herridge contributed to this report.

Source : foxnews[dot]com Read More

Obama urges UN to reject 'violence and intolerance' amid Mideast unrest

President Obama, facing questions at home concerning his administration's handling of the deadly attacks in Libya and growing anti-American violence, plans to tell a gathering of world leaders at the U.N. that unrest in the Middle East and North Africa marks a critical juncture -- a choice in the region between hope and intolerance. 

Obama, in prepared remarks for his U.N. General Assembly address Tuesday morning, said the attacks on U.S. embassies abroad "are not simply an assault on America." 

"They are also an assault on the very ideals upon which the United Nations was founded," the president said. He urged these countries and their citizens to reject those whipping up the furor. 

"If we are serious about those ideals, we must speak honestly about the deeper causes of this crisis. Because we face a choice between the forces that would drive us apart, and the hopes we hold in common," Obama said. "Today, we must affirm that our future will be determined by people like Chris Stevens, and not by his killers. Today, we must declare that this violence and intolerance has no place among our United Nations." 

Stevens is the U.S. ambassador to Libya who was killed along with three other Americans in the attack on the U.S. Consulate earlier this month. 

The address Tuesday morning is a chance for Obama to explain what he views as America's role in the tumultuous Arab Spring aftermath -- and whether this period is one that should cause the U.S. concern. The last time Obama addressed the assembly, there was an air of hope surrounding the Arab Spring. U.S. officials remain optimistic, but some also worry that the latest unrest is perhaps the dark side of the revolution.   

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, previewing the speech Monday, said it "always provides an opportunity for the president to put the international situation in context and to put forward a vision of U.S. leadership, and that's what he will do." 

The relationship between the Libya attack and the protests against an anti-Islam film elsewhere in the region remains unclear. Obama, in an interview on Monday, said the Libya attack was not just a "mob action." 

In his U.N. address, Obama still plans to discuss the film. 

"There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. There is no video that justifies an attack on an embassy," Obama said. "There is no slander that provides an excuse for people to burn a restaurant in Lebanon, or destroy a school in Tunis, or cause death and destruction in Pakistan." 

The president, at a time when he's being accused by critics of ignoring some of Israel's concerns, also plans to discuss the Iranian nuclear threat. 

"America wants to resolve this issue through diplomacy, and we believe that there is still time and space to do so. But that time is not unlimited," Obama said in prepared remarks. "Make no mistake: a nuclear-armed Iran is not a challenge that can be contained." 

He said "the United States will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon." 

The speech Tuesday morning will kick off a day heavy on foreign policy for both the president and his Republican opponent Mitt Romney. 

Romney addressed the Clinton Global Initiative in New York City in the morning, and Obama is expected to address the initiative later in the day. 

Republicans leaders are hoping Obama on Tuesday will make clear his position on several foreign policy fronts. 

Sen. John McCain, the ranking Republican on the Senate Committee on Armed Services, and other party members have suggested that the president's policy of pulling out of Afghanistan and Iraq while offering less than total support for Israel's effort to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons has left U.S. interests vulnerable. 

They also have questioned his position on the so-called Arab Spring, in which several dictatorships were removed and residents were left with democratic governments potentially susceptible to Islamist and militant influence. 

On Monday, Wyoming GOP Sen. John Barrasso outlined several messages he thinks Americans want to hear during Obama's speech at the United Nations General Assembly, including that the war on terror is not over and the anti-Islamic film alone did not spark the Middle East violence. He also called for an assessment of the real state of  U.S.-Russia relations since leaders pressed to so-called "reset button," as well as a full commitment to Israel. 

"When the president says 'We have your back,' the world needs to know what he actually means," Barrasso told Fox News. 

Carney vehemently defended the country's commitment to Israel and the president's belief that Egypt, Libya and other Middle East countries will eventually achieve democracy. 

"I think the president's views on these matters are very clear and very strong," Carney said. "We have an unshakeable commitment to Israel's security and we have proven that commitment. ... The president, again, has made clear on numerous occasions that Israel is our closest ally in the region."

Source : foxnews[dot]com Read More

Clergy brace for congregations' questions about possible evidence Jesus was married

Pastors around the nation are bracing for questions from curious congregants, after a Harvard professor claimed a fragment of text from the fourth century suggests Jesus may have been married.

Karen King, a professor of early Christianity at Harvard Divinity School, announced Tuesday that the tiny scrap of papyrus contains dialogue that includes the words "Jesus said to them, 'My wife..'"

The text, written in Coptic and likely translated from a second-century Greek text, was produced by an unknown author roughly 300 years after Jesus' death. It is the "only extant ancient text which explicitly portrays Jesus as referring to a wife," according to King.

"I think preachers should handle this by telling members of their churches that the Bible that we have is reliable."

- Thomas White, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

While the authenticity and truth behind the document is being debated, clergy will likely be confronted with questions from parishioners about the finding, which runs at odds with Christian tradition maintaining Jesus was unmarried. The finding also stirs up debate on the role of women in the church and celibacy among priests.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops told FoxNews.com Thursday that the conference "has not issued any guidance on this development." Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi has refused to question King's scholarship, although he said in an interview with AFP that "we do not really know where this little scrap of parchment came from."

"This does not change anything in the position of the church, which rests on an enormous tradition, which is very clear and unanimous," Lombardi said.

He added that this discovery should not change the teachings from the altar. 

"This changes nothing in the portrayal of Christ and the gospels. This is not an event that has any influence on Catholic doctrine," he said.

In Baptist churches throughout the country, meanwhile, pastors will speak on the matter as they see fit.

"Each [Baptist] church is autonomous," said Thomas White, vice president of student services and communications at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas. "So there's really not going to be any guidelines."

But White and prominent Baptist leaders have made their rejections of the finding clear.

"I think preachers should handle this by telling members of their churches that the Bible that we have is reliable," White told FoxNews.com. "This document that's come to light is a suspect document from the fourth century. We don't know who translated it. We don't know who wrote it. It's only eight lines, smaller than a business card."

Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., issued a statement on King's finding that was more conspiratorial.     

"This is sensationalism masquerading as scholarship," Mohler said in a posting Thursday on his website. "The energy behind all this is directed to the replacement of orthodox Christianity, its truth claims, its doctrines, its moral convictions, and its vision of both history and eternity with a secularized - indeed, Gnositicized - new version."

King, who presented the finding Tuesday at an international Coptic studies conference in Rome, has acknowledged in interviews that the papyrus does not prove Jesus had a wife, "given the late date of the fragment and the probable date of original composition."

King said, however, that the fragment is "direct evidence" of a debate by early Christians over Jesus' marital status.

Several scholars claim the writing could very well be authentic but say they give no credence to the claim that Jesus was married.

"The writing is probably authentic," author and religious historian Richard Sorensen said. "However, the idea that Jesus had a wife is a specious claim."

"There is no word of this whatsoever" from "everybody that knew Jesus and spent any time with him," Sorensen said. "It's totally in disagreement with the people who lived during his time.

"I think that the author of it [the papyrus] had an agenda - a philosophical agenda - and it's not Christian," he continued. "I see this simply as one more ancient revisiting of the gospel. ... People have an idea and they continue to popularize that idea and they continue to look for evidence of it."

Source : foxnews[dot]com Read More