Benghazi evaporates further:STEVENS turned down military security twice. Not blaming the victim here
1) Not blaming the victim: This shows the wingnut scoundrelism in fueling "scandals" for politics and their anti-democratic (small "d"
refusal to accept others winning elections and consequent obstruction of governing by others.
2) There is RISK in any kind of government service and those who take it on know it. Plus, mass bureaucratic machines include all stripes of human talents and capabilities, including some bozos making mistakes, some nefarious individuals sabotaging, and some John WAYNES acting from movies concepts.
3) The scale of Benghazi, even if it were "something," pales compared to RAYGUN's 1983 Beirut bombing of 241 servicemen.
*************QUOTE*************
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html#.UZTr20Eo5jr
[font size=5]Ambassador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security, U.S. officials say[/font]
By Nancy A. Youssef | McClatchy Foreign Staff
CAIRO — .... ...The deteriorating security situation in Benghazi had been the subject of a meeting that embassy officials held 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. ....
Army Gen. Carter Ham, then the head of the U.S. Africa Command, did not wait for the separate 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 it did not, the officials said.
Weeks later, Stevens traveled to Germany for an already scheduled meeting with Ham at AFRICOM headquarters. During that meeting, Ham again offered additional military assets, and Stevens again said no, the two offici als said. ....
Stevens’ deputy, [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Gregory Hicks[/FONT], who might be expected to be aware of the ambassador’s exchange with military leaders, [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]was not asked about the offer[/FONT] of additional assistance during his appearance before a House of Representatives [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]committee last week[/FONT], and [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]testimony has not been sought from Ham[/FONT], who is now retired.
Both Hicks and Ham declined to comment on the exchange between Ham and Stevens. Hicks’ lawyer, [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Victoria Toensing, said Hicks did not know[/FONT] the details of conversations between Stevens and Ham and was not aware of Stevens turning down an offer of additional security. ....
But a spokesman for Rep. [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Darrell Issa[/FONT], R-Calif., the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, indicated that some lawmakers may have been [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]aware of Stevens’ exchange with Ham[/FONT]. ....
James Rosen and Jonathan S.Landay contributed from Washington.
Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html#.UZP2daKyB8G#storylink=cpy
************UNQUOTE*************
= new reply since forum marked as read
