Skip to comments.In Benghazi timeline, CIA errors but no evidence of conspiracy
Posted on 11/01/2012 4:16:38 PM PDT by Calpublican
click here to read article
“We can all rest easy now that this has been thoroughly investigated”
WASHINGTON, Nov. 2 (UPI) — The CIA was the real commanding agency at the attacked U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, not the State Department, senior U.S. intelligence officials said.
In addition, two of the four men who died in the Sept. 11 attack — former Navy SEAL commandos Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty — were actually CIA contractors killed defending the mission, not State Department contract security officers, as originally publicly identified, the officials told several news organizations on condition of anonymity.
The new information does not address the Obama administration’s various depictions of whether the assault was a protest that turned violent or a planned terrorist attack. But the officials reiterated early intelligence was patchy and often contradictory. They said talking points for members of Congress and senior administration officials did not at first discuss possible links between the attackers and al-Qaida because the information was classified.
“It wasn’t until after the points were used in public that people reconciled contradictory information and assessed there probably wasn’t a protest around the time of the attack,” a senior U.S. intelligence official said in a statement.
Congressional investigators say it appears the CIA and State Department weren’t on the same page about their respective security roles at the consulate, which the Journal said raised questions about whether the Benghazi security arrangement was flawed.
I've had that screen name since day one. Every now and then I think the time to change it has come. But then some stupid person (usually a politician, usually a mentally diseased liberal) does something stupid and I change my mind.
On paper but not in fact. They punted to the CIA if you believe the timeline. Malicious neglect.
The WH is ultimately responsible.
You don’t pour diesel fuel into the office/residence and set fire to it if the objective is to capture him.
Obama and Hillary have already claimed responsibility. They just don’t want the consequences that come with it.
Scratching my head. I had to read this several times. So they did not laser the mortars, instead the attackers firing weapons? Am I reading this right? We are supposed to believe the laser was used only in hopes of making the attackers go away and not because they wanted the attacker obliterated?
Thanks for your thoughts.
I think they were trying to smoke him out. I didn't say they were smart though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.