Amb. Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security, U.S. officials say

[IDemo]

Source: McClatchy

CAIRO — In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government officials have told McClatchy.

Why Stevens, who died of smoke inhalation in the first of two attacks that took place late Sept. 11 and early Sept. 12, would turn down the offers remains unclear. The deteriorating security situation in Benghazi had been the subject of a meeting that embassy officials held on Aug. 15, where they concluded they could not defend the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi. The next day, the embassy drafted a cable outlining the dire circumstances and saying it would spell out what it needed in a separate cable.

“In light of the uncertain security environment, US Mission Benghazi will submit specific requests to US Embassy Tripoli for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs by separate cover,” the cable, which was first reported by Fox News, said.

The then head of U.S. Africa Command, Army Gen. Carter Ham did not wait for that second cable, however. Instead, after reading the Aug. 16 cable, Ham phoned Stevens and asked if the embassy needed a special security team from the U.S. military. Stevens told Ham they did not, the officials said.



Read more: http://www.idahostatesman.com/2013/05/14/2576166/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html

[No Vested Interest]

1. It has been my opinion, as stated before on this site,

that Amb. Stevens took undue risk in going to Benghazi on Sept. 11, and knowing that security was not as it should be.

Because of his tragic death, the administration would not, could not, blame him, but frankly, looking at the outcome objectively, he was somewhat to blame for the outcome.

[cosmicone]

3. shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Don't tell Fox News that Ambassador Stevens was a part of the conspiracy! It may make Lindsey Graham and John McCain finally have a satisfactory bowel movement.

[Vestigial_Sister]

6. only after...

they remove the very long sticks.

[John2]

8. Well, I think

this made what occurred with his diary more interesting because the people claiming Stephens continued to ask for security comes from the Republicans. That diary was on Stephens' possession or with him when he died but it was passed on to a CNN reporter. A former BUsh operative for the intelligence agency was working as a consultant with CNN at the time. I keep wondering how they obtained that Diary and why it wasn't given to investigators in Libya. That should be evidence and tampering with an investigation, it seems to me. Even though this person was with the Press, they should never be allowed into an area where an investigation is ongoing unless they are cleared to do so. I do remember the FBI was delayed at the airport from some reports because they claimed it was still too dangerous. I think that is very important and that reporter needs to answer questions.

[Iliyah]

2. Amb. Stevens and the other

are true American who died needlessly and the RWers disgraced their memory by using this tragedy for political gains. Shame shame shame on them.

[Cha]

4. Thank you, IDemo. This is so sad.. Amb Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and

Tyrone Woods were honored when they were killed.



h/t she http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1102&pid=9863

And, now the republicons have been dishonoring them with their "bonghazi" spamghazi circle of hell.

[leveymg]

5. The reason for this was that Stevens was working with militant groups in Benghazi.

He believed he didn't need protection from those who he had helped overthrow Khadaffi, with whom he knew were forming the backbone of US-supported Jihadi and Salafist groups fighting to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria.

This was my first conclusion written a couple days after the attack, at a time the US was still trying to obscure its role in the Libya to Syria foreign fighters and arms pipeline: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/14/1131854/-Blowback-in-Benghazi-Attack-Linked-to-Regime-Change-Operations-in-Libya-and-Syria

Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 10:45 AM PDT
Blowback in Benghazi: Attack Linked to Regime Change Operations in Libya and Syria

Questions have been asked why Ambassador Chris Stevens had such a small security entourage when he visited Benghazi in Eastern Libya. The answer to that is that Stevens believed that he was safe because he routinely worked with Libyan militant groups in the area.

Ambassador Stevens was the US coordinator in Bengahzi during the uprising against Ghadaffi, coordinating the same groups of Libyan Jihadi groups that now provide much of the foreign manpower used to overthrow the Syrian regime.

- MORE -

[No Vested Interest]

7. Unfortunately, he was wrong. nt

[John2]

9. So that implies

he wasn't just working as an Ambassador but was facilitating the CIA. I'm of the impression the Republicans knew about it too. I'm also of the impression the militia groups responsible for Stevens' protection betrayed him. In the real time video, they left the area when he was present as if this was a setup. The whole situation smells. Where is the focus on Petraeus, the CIA and the Libyan Government for this disaster? They were the ones responsible for security and I feel they failed the President and the American people. Petraeus is responsible because he was in charge of security, not the State Department.

[John2]

10. The CIA could have

over ridden Stevens. It is their responsibility for security and protecting U.S. interests, not the State Department. That is why the head of the CIA was appointed by the President. The State Department is responsible for Diplomacy not security interests. The military can override them when it comes to security purposes.

[DCBob]

11. This will be ignored by the Faux Newz crowd.