Joe DiGenova, an attorney for one of the Benghazi whistleblowers, said in a radio interview that one of the reasons people have been so tight lipped about what happened to our diplomats is that 400 US missiles diverted to Libiya were stolen and ended up in the hands of some "very ugly people."

Breitbart:

DiGenova represents Benghazi whistleblower Mark Thompson. He told WMAL that he "does not know whether [the missiles] were at the annex, but it is clear the annex was somehow involved in the distribution of those missiles."

He claimed his information "comes from a former intelligence official who stayed in constant contact with people in the special ops and intelligence community." He said the biggest concern right now is finding those missiles before they can be put to use. "They are worried, specifically according to these sources, about an attempt to shoot down an airliner," he claimed.

On August 4, Breitbart News covered a report in The Telegraph that said 35 CIA operatives were working in Benghazi when the attack against the consulate took place. The Telegraph claimed these operatives were allegedly in an "annex near the consulate [working] on a project to supply missiles from Libyan armories to Syrian Rebels."

Months earlier, following then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta's February 7 testimony on Capitol Hill about the Benghazi attacks, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) suggested that one of the causes behind the terrorist attack "may have been that there was a gun running operation going on in Benghazi, leaving Libya and going to Turkey and [distributing] arms to the [Syrian] rebels."

The scenario is plausible but is the source credible? DiGenova would have no reason to lie but what about the "former" intel official? Given the information that we have, the idea that 400 missiles would go missing and presumed stolen is a little far fetched. If they are surface to air missiles, you'd need several dozen trucks to move them. And where are the Americans during the time it took to load these missiles and abscond with them?

Not dismissing the story outright but before we accept it, we'd need considerably more information.