"The C.I.A.’s Part in Benghazi" [View all]

[applegrove]

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"