Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(118,642 posts)
Sun May 26, 2013, 12:21 AM May 2013

"The C.I.A.’s Part in Benghazi"

The C.I.A.’s Part in Benghazi

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD at the NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/opinion/the-cias-part-in-benghazi.html?smid=re-share&_r=0

"SNIP......................


Other e-mails show that it was the F.B.I., which led the inquiry, and the C.I.A.’s general counsel and deputy director who wanted references to Ansar al-Sharia deleted to avoid compromising the investigation. Another intelligence official wrote that there was no “actionable intelligence” that foretold an attack of the kind that occurred.

Republicans faulted the State Department for objecting to the C.I.A.’s initial draft. But the department seemed concerned mostly that the C.I.A. would say more to lawmakers than what could be shared with reporters or that the C.I.A. was trying to suggest that warnings about the attack had been ignored.

To a degree, the wrangling occurred because the C.I.A. annex was a classified operation. In fact, the C.I.A. was the main American presence on the ground in Benghazi, had relationships with local groups and was supposed to have the best fix on what was going on. There are serious questions as to why the agency did not have a better handle on security and didn’t do a better job of vetting the local militia that was hired for protection.

The State Department did a full a public review of its behavior and accepted the conclusion that “systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels” in two bureaus created “a security posture that was inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place.” Reforms are under way. Congress needs to look closely at the C.I.A.’s role and insist that the agency do the same.


......................SNIP"
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"The C.I.A.’s Part in Benghazi" (Original Post) applegrove May 2013 OP
What was the CIA up to in Benghazi? Comrade Grumpy May 2013 #1
I read yesterday that the CIA and Stevens applegrove May 2013 #2
Torture would be my guess. OnyxCollie May 2013 #3
"Move along. Nothing to see here." - Pet Rayus (R) Berlum May 2013 #4
Hmmmm. Warren DeMontague May 2013 #5
Maybe this is why Repubs have put it on the back burner?? kentuck May 2013 #6
But but but Betrayus resigned over some sex scandal malaise May 2013 #7
But that doesn't fit the storyline that the GOP wants to push. You know it was Susan Rice and Obama kelliekat44 May 2013 #8

applegrove

(118,642 posts)
2. I read yesterday that the CIA and Stevens
Sun May 26, 2013, 02:10 AM
May 2013

were involved in trying to buy back shoulder to air missiles that were lost during the Libyan civil war two years ago. It wasn't from a reputable source/or a source I was familiar with so I didn't post it on the DU. Don't know if that is true. But it makes alot of sense if Ambassador Stevens was there to buy weapons back from militants and they used the opportunity to ambush the Americans.

 

OnyxCollie

(9,958 posts)
3. Torture would be my guess.
Sun May 26, 2013, 02:37 AM
May 2013

An increased military presence would not be be desirable if a covert torture operation was going on.

 

kelliekat44

(7,759 posts)
8. But that doesn't fit the storyline that the GOP wants to push. You know it was Susan Rice and Obama
Sun May 26, 2013, 09:30 AM
May 2013

and HRC who is to blame.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"The C.I.A.’s Part in Ben...