The Corner - National Review Online: "how do you explain the testimony that Petraeus gave, when it contradicted the testimony that the CIA station chief in Libya had told them, when it contradicted what Panetta had briefed, and what everybody at the time was saying. Now, the Broadwell disclosure that we just saw is important not because people are now getting all upset about it, because it might have disclosed secret information, but because it might tell us what might have been a motive for the CIA to disguise, to lie about, or to cover up what was happening in Benghazi."
'via Blog this'
I agree. I think that the CIA has every incentive not to let us know if this really was an attack to free prisoners.
While I hope the CIA does detain these people, it certainly would be damaging to its operations and relations in the region if it gets out that's what is happening. It also would be damaging to the president's political capital--and until last Thursday, his reelection chances.
It would also confirm that we mismanaged the entire situation, and confirm that the attack could and should have been anticipated.
No comments:
Post a Comment