| Ckmlb1 said: Also, LA Times is reporting that the information about a protest attack came from the CIA originally. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/middleeast/la-na-benghazi-emails-20130516,0,75839.story Excerpts: "But a senior administration official said Wednesday that Michael Morell, then the acting CIA director, already had decided to remove references to the CIA warnings. The White House released a photocopy of what it said was Morell's hand-marked copy." "In December, a report by the Senate Homeland Security Committee concluded that U.S. intelligence agencies didn't look hard at "whether a protest had in fact occurred." The CIA's description of a protest in Benghazi was based on "news reports and on other information available to intelligence agencies," the report said." |
How did the information about a protest come from the CIA if the CIA was getting its information from news reports? Wouldn't it be, "The CIA had no information and didn't seem very interested in obtaining any, so they just read the news and said, 'Yeah. That.'" And... is the CIA really this worthless?
Odd that some people - like Greg Hicks - knew almost immediately who was involved in the attack and others, including the Central Intelligence Agency apparently, didn't.
