attack there, and its context, turned up no evidence that al qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. the attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from nato's extensive air power and logistic support during the uprising against colonel gadhafi. and contrary to claims by some members of congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an american-made video, denigrating islam. so the al qaeda connection and the video, two key points. how do you know it wasn't al qaeda? >> well, i don't think i'm out on a limb there. i think, honestly, if you asked anybody in the u.s. intelligence business, they would tell you the same thing. >> do you realize what he just said there? do you realize what he just said? the entire scandal that started, which was about this actually being al qaeda and then being covered up, and the idea that the spontaneous reaction to a video was a ridiculous fib, the