You are looking at it from the U.S. administration point of view, which only tells one half of the story. When you look at it from the Libyan attackers point of view, it opens up a lot more answers. If they (the Libyan attackers) were trying to free Omar Abdel-Rahman in a prisoner transfer, then the ambassador (taken alive) would have been their best option. And we know that freeing Abdel-Rahman is a major goal of many terrorists, especially those associated with Egypt. If that is the reason they went there, to grab Stevens to trade him for Abdel-Rahman, then everything the Libyans did after the attack (i.e. taking Stevens to the hospital, trying CPR for 90 minutes) makes sense. Without that motivation on the part of the Libyans, none of that makes sense. None of it. I am looking at the verifiable facts. At the time of Stevens death, Libya was under Hillry's control. AND so far there is no reason to believe anything other than 4 Americans were slaughtered, and all the weapons, gold and 'intel' was taken by unnamed 'workers'. NOT one outside of Libya responded to aide our peoples, and I considered that calculated prior. Thus far, I consider it chatter that there was a legitimate plan in place to take alive Stevens. Nothing else points in that direction.