Gregory Hicks: Benghazi and the Smearing of Chris Stevens

Last week the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence issued its report on the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya. The report concluded that the attack, which resulted in the murder of four Americans, was "preventable." Some have been suggesting that the blame for this tragedy lies at least partly with Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was killed in the attack. This is untrue: The blame lies entirely with Washington.

The report states that retired Gen. Carter Ham, then-commander of the U.S. Africa Command (Africom) headquartered in Stuttgart, Germany, twice offered to "sustain" the special forces security team in Tripoli and that Chris twice "declined." Since Chris cannot speak, I want to explain the reasons and timing for his responses to Gen. Ham. As the deputy chief of mission, I was kept informed by Chris or was present throughout the process.

On Aug. 1, 2012, the day after I arrived in Tripoli, Chris invited me to a video conference with Africom to discuss changing the mission of the U.S. Special Forces from protecting the U.S. Embassy and its personnel to training Libyan forces. This change in mission would result in the transfer of authority over the unit in Tripoli from Chris to Gen. Ham. In other words, the special forces would report to the Defense Department, not State.

The Senate report is better than what I expected. At least it says the video had nothing to do with it.

It was bipartisan, and the Dems worked to get a lot of things taken out of it or ignored (such as Hicks’ account). However, even the Dems had to admit that it was a massive failure, and I guess that’s something.

State Department Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy is mostly to blame for the disaster at Benghazi for refusing the SST (Site Security Team) extension of one more year, thinking that locals could provide security.

Stevens believed that if there was trouble he could rely on support from operators at the CIA station house nearby.

Stevens also believed that he had such good rapport with the local militias that the Mission could rely on them also to keep the neighborhood quiet.

Stevens also believed that the weapons the Brits stored at our Mission when they bailed out would stay secret, even though locals working for us were aware.

Iranian Quds Force operators were in the area and wanted our CIA Station House degraded so that they could buy Ghaddafi’s weapons more easily, especially the SAMs. They were the mortar attack team and set up the kill zones on the streets between the Mission and the CIA Station that night.

So, the enemy was a complicated coalition that used our vulnerability.

Stevens always had the option of closing the Mission. The locals that were our security told him of the danger there that night and most of them bailed out.

BTW, Stevens ordered the storage of all that fuel used to burn the Mission. The fuel was to be used for our vehicles in case we chose to bail also.

It was a perfect storm of naivete, hubris, bad neighbors and lack of situational awareness. That is what happens when diplomats are charged with force protection.

Ambassador Stevens was a homosexual, was he not? Might there have been some past interaction with Obama that needed to be flushed down the memory hole, with no living witness? Hitlery need not have been involved if the stand down came from the CIC.

My conspiracy theory, good as any other (or maybe not).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.