What everyone missed with the Benghazi story.

The victims of the Benghazi attack return home -AP

The attack on the consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya resulted in hundreds of articles and opinion pieces, the vast majority of which were politically motivated. Even today conservatives and liberals are arguing about who was responsible for what and whether or not Obama handled it correctly. Some of this reporting was important. The fact that the maker of a terrible movie, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, spent time in jail over this is a serious 1st amendment issue. Whether or not there was a stand down order and whether or not the attacks were motivated by The Innocence of Muslims are also relevant. But many, perhaps more important questions have largely been unasked and unanswered. 

Most of you probably know the story of Benghazi by now but just in case I will recap it again. After the brief civil war where Muamarr Gaddafi was overthrown the United States established a consulate in Benghazi Libya. The Ambassador to Libya, Christoper Stevens, by all accounts beloved and very effective in his job, was visiting the consulate on 9/11/12 when it came under attack but militants. In the ensuing battle Stevens and Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith died after the compound was lit ablaze by the militants. 

Hours later a second compound came under attack in the same city. A CIA annex, the purpose of which has never been publicly revealed was assaulted by more militants. In a destructive and intense battle two more U.S. Citizens were killed, former Navy Seals and current CIA officers Glen Dohrety and Tyrone S. Woods, and an undetermined number of people were wounded. Dohrety and Woods were killed in a mortar strike while they were providing overwatch on the roof of the CIA annex. 

In the aftermath of the attack there was an insane rush to blame or defend the president. Questions were asked about what motivated the terrorists, could help have arrived in time, was it the fault of a stupid video, was there a cover up and eventually what does it even matter? But very few people asked why the CIA was there in the first place. Amazingly the CIA annex was revealed accidentally in a session of congress. Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz objected to a satellite image (warning, biased source, but it was the best i could find) revealing that there was a second compound that had been attacked.  Until this point it was not known that the two former Navy Seals had been killed at this secret facility. 

Still, very few people noticed or questioned the existence of a second instillation in Benghazi. All the focus was on either smearing or defending Obama. Nobody ever seemed to ask why there was a CIA facility there and what they were doing. Such questions were politically inappropriate and given how classified the CIA annex was very few people know the truth. But the CIA annex will have far more of an impact then anyone gave it credit for. It's a story of backhanded politics, global warfare, gun running, terrorism and, worst of all, secrecy. 

What was the purpose of the CIA annex? It has to do with so called MANPADS (man portable air defense system), specifically Libyan SA-7's. After the fall of Gaddafi the massive amount of military equipment, including MANPADS were left unsecured. This was a huge problem. MANPADS are specifically designed to destroy airplanes and if they were to fall into the wrong hands it would be the perfect terrorist weapon. Part of the CIA operation was to collect these weapons and control them. And if that was all that had happened it would have been fine. But it has been accused of being far more than that.

Syrian Rebels fire a SA-7 at a Helicopter 

Seymour Hersh, famed journalist who exposed the Mai Li massacre in Vietnam, and exposed military abuse in the Iraq War at Abu Ghraib prison, suggests a much darker motive. In his amazing article, The Red Line and the Rat Line, Hersh accuses, among a great many other things, that the Benghazi consulate and the CIA annex were primarily a gun running operation. And some of those guns ended up being MANPADS. 

After the outbreak of the Syrian Civil War, much was made of U.S. support of the rebels. In the build up to the aborted war and after it was called off, the United States provided weapons and other support to the FSA. It was claimed at first that it was only small arms and non-military equipment. However, a ship called Al Entisar was received in the Turkish port of Iskenderun on 9/6/12. On board this ship were 400 tons of supplies... and heavy weapons including the SA-7's and RPG's. Apparently, the last meeting Ambassador Stevens had was with a Turkish Diplomat about these weapons.   

After the destruction of the CIA annex and the death of Stevens the CIA operation was terminated. Control of the gun running fell to the Turks, who according to Hersh, have very different priorities in Syria then the United States. At the time the first priority was to destroy the Syrian government. Hersh made the shocking allegation that NATO member and U.S. ally Turkey used a false flag chemical attack through Al-Nursra front proxy soldiers in an effort to bring the United States into the war. Such an explosive accusation did not go unchallenged and I won't comment on it further since I don't have the expertise to determine the veracity of the report . But the so called "rat line" seems plausible. And the Turks are now in control of it and they have been accused with working with terrorist groups.

And that brings up the worst case scenario. Libyan MANPADS, smuggled into Syria have fallen into the hands of, at the very least, Al-Queda. Since the FSA have recently been transferring over to ISIS as well according to some reports, it's possible that an even more brutal terrorist group has access to these weapons as well. Every airport in the Middle East, and perhaps even Europe, is now at risk of a missile attack from these MANPADS.

That is if you believe Hersh. He has been accurate before and the "rat line" explanation does explain a lot. But he has been roundly criticized by other journalists for only using anonymous sources. The MANPADS found in Syria haven't been proven to be from Libya and it's possible that the gunrunning could have happened without CIA help. Turkey and the United States of course deny everything. As it stands right now it's impossible to know the truth.

But it does raise questions. First and foremost, are Hersh's allegations true? That would have a huge impact on U.S./Turkey relations, the role of NATO and would completely alter the public's perception of the Benghazi scandal. Second, if it is true, what the hell were the CIA and the Obama administration thinking? Even back then it was clear that fundamentalist groups were running around, bringing more heavy weapons into that environment was a horrible idea.Third, if it wasn't the "rat line" what was the CIA doing there? Securing MANPADS? So if their operation was destroyed is nothing being done to secure the weapons? 

We might never know the truth about what happened in Benghazi in our lifetimes. All I know for sure is that a major CIA operation got burned and burned badly. This was a major tactical and strategic defeat, and if Hersh's allegations are true then a major intelligence and foreign policy blunder as well. That, not the video, the "stand down order" or "why does it matter" is the real story of Benghazi...