How Can We Understand Benghazi Without Probing the CIA's Role?

Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif spoke at the memorial service in Tripoli, Libya, Thursday, Sept. 20, 2012, for U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens. Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif spoke at the memorial service in Tripoli, Libya, Thursday, Sept. 20, 2012, for U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens. Abdel Magid al-Fergany/AP

After catching up on coverage of the Benghazi attack over the weekend, there's something that has me very confused: why are so many journalists ignoring the fact that the Americans there were mostly CIA? Here's how The New York Times began a Benghazi story published online Sunday: "A House committee chairman vowed Sunday to seek additional testimony on the Obama administration's handling of last year's deadly attack on the American diplomatic post in Libya." 

Mark Steyn's latest National Review piece on Benghazi doesn't mention the CIA. Neither does this Weekly Standard piece, in which Victoria Toensing complains that a recent report about Benghazi "was purposefully incomplete and willfully misleading." And Stephen F. Hayes, whose work on Benghazi iswidely cited among conservatives, refers to "the assault on the U.S. diplomatic post" and CIA warnings about a "potential attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in the region."

Read more at The Atlantic.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Close [ x ] More from GovExec
X CLOSE Don't show again

Like us on Facebook