If Stevens was denied adequate security....then why did he go? It was the 9/11 anniversary, protests all over the ME, Benghazi was in a state of anarcy, Lybia's president says he warned of an attack three days in advance, almost all the foreign diplomats and NGOs had evacuated and relocated to Tripoli..... so who told Ambassador that it was safe to go to Benghazi? It had to be the CIA....who else?
Heads did roll. They don't call him "former" CIA director for nothing.
What don't you get Moot.....he was Ordered to go. He can't refuse a direct order.
Also, we have the dispute between the CIA and State over the emails. Here are the 12 ABC was brought up about.
Benghazi e-mails show clash between State Department, CIA.....
Published: May 10, 2013
New details from administration e-mails about last year’s attacks on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya, demonstrate that an intense bureaucratic clash took place between the State Department and the CIA over which agency would get to tell the story of how the tragedy unfolded.
That clash played out in the development of administration talking points that have been at the center of the controversy over the handling of the incident, according to the e-mails that came to light Friday.
Friday’s revelations — ABC News published 12 versions of the talking points — produced the latest round of Benghazi post-mortems in the eight months since the attacks. Senior administration officials said in a briefing for reporters that none of Obama’s political advisers were involved in discussions around the original talking points, only national security staff officials.
According to various drafts of the talking points, shaped before the final editing by the White House and other agencies, State Department officials raised concerns that the CIA-drafted version could be used by members of Congress to criticize diplomatic security preparedness in Benghazi.
One version of the talking points, drafted by the CIA, noted that unknown gunmen had carried out at least five recent attacks in and around Benghazi against “foreign interests.” The final version, however, did not include those warnings after Victoria Nuland, the State Department’s chief spokeswoman at the time, protested in e-mails to White House national security staff and other agencies involved in editing the talking points.
CIA officials said in the weeks after the Benghazi attack that Ansar al-Sharia, a group affiliated with al-Qaeda, was not mentioned in the final talking points because the information was classified — even though the early versions made public this week showed that the agency initially intended to name the group.
Reports about the e-mails surfaced two days after three State Department officials appeared before Congress on Wednesday and criticized administration actions before, during and after the September assaults.
But White House officials were directly involved in developing the talking points through discussions with the CIA, the State Department, the FBI, the Justice Department, and elements of the Pentagon.....snip~
Benghazi e-mails show clash between State Department, CIA - The Washington Post