The article agrees with you, the attack could be predicted. What is enumerated are myths (logical negations).
My sentence structure in post 9 was wacky. I was trying not to write a double positive. Or something like that.
To be clear - yes, the Benghazi attack could have been predicted. My argument is the WH schemed up this plan, not expecting it to go wrong, and so anything planned could be predicted.
Even if this was not a bungled up White Hut scheme, just the basic facts as we know them now lead us to realize this was gross incompetence with predictable results.