John, I'm telling you I'm really scared man. These guys are killers. Clinton won't even answer my calls about beefing up security. Can you help us? .... John? John?
Posted on 12/02/2015 4:04:29 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
The political fallout from the 2012 terrorist attacks on a U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya, has had a chilling effect on the Foreign Service that has left U.S. diplomats wary of treading into areas with questionable security.
Multiple former diplomats and other knowledgeable sources say security precautions in the Foreign Service have intensified since Benghazi, with officials in Washington fearful of another disaster abroad.
Former diplomats say the heightened security has become excessive and warn that American leadership is suffering as a result.
"It undermines the ability of our diplomats to do our job when you essentially have a governor in place that restricts their every movement and the decision process of the security because nobody wants anything to happen," said James Smith, who served as ambassador to Saudi Arabia until 2013 and is now president of the consulting firm C&M International.
"There's a lot of officer pushback on this," added another source with knowledge of the State Department and the Foreign Service. "I don't think there's anything more frustrating for a member of the Foreign Service than to be out there, deployed abroad, and unable to do any good."
The State Department has repeatedly argued that the tight security has not led to a loss of U.S. clout, but diplomats paint a different picture.
A survey of 1,600 active-duty State Department employees released in April by the American Foreign Service Association found that more than half believed that "post-Benghazi, it is now more difficult for employees to effectively engage overseas." Twenty-five percent of diplomatic security agents said the same thing.
Additionally, just one-quarter of State Department employees and less than 10 percent of diplomatic security agents said that the department "has struck the right risk/reward balance."
Complaints about the "Benghazi effect" have bubble up to Congress.
"I have had a number of Foreign Service officers express concern that in the wake of Benghazi they're being too heavily circumscribed in what they're allowed to do and where they can go to meet people," said Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), "and [they] feel that we're maybe moving too much towards making a fortress out of our diplomatic facilities."
Schiff is the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee and also sits on the House panel on Benghazi.
The State Department portrays its security duties as a balancing act, with officials weighing the desire of diplomats to get out in the field against the safety concerns of security agents.
Too little security leaves American diplomats vulnerable to attacks from protesters, terrorists or hostile governments. But too much can leave diplomats stuck behind embassy walls, unable to build crucial relationships with local officials, activists and bureaucrats.
"Keeping U.S. personnel overseas safe is an ongoing, evolving process defined by proactive planning and responsive improvements," Gregory Starr, the State Department's assistant secretary of State for diplomatic security, testified in the House Select Committee on Benghazi one year ago.
Secretary of State John Kerry was more forceful in May 2013 while speaking at a seminar on overseas security eight months after the Benghazi attack killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.
"We will not pull back," Kerry insisted. "Retreating behind the wire cannot be the way that we do business."
The State Department declined to comment for this story.
The limits placed on Americans abroad manifest themselves in several ways, according to former diplomats who have experienced them firsthand.
"The net effect is you limit the ability of people to move around," said James Cunningham, who served as ambassador to Afghanistan from the summer of 2012 through December 2014 and is now a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.
In Afghanistan, civilians have been removed from some parts of the country because of decisions that Cunningham said "were clearly influenced by this heightened sensitivity in Washington to security issues."
"Those decisions may have come out the same way anyway," he acknowledged, "but it was clear that there was closer attention being paid to the cost-benefit ratio of having people in various places."
Ronald Neumann, a longtime diplomat and former ambassador to Afghanistan, recalled attending an October security dialogue with diplomats from all corners of the globe - with one glaring exception.
"The British Embassy was represented, the French Embassy was represented, the Russians were represented, the Iranians were represented," said Neumann, who has since left the government and is now president of the American Academy of Diplomacy. "There were no official Americans. I know it was because of security."
The scenario is becoming increasingly common, Neumann warned, due to heightened restrictions on Foreign Service officers.
U.S. embassies and consulates were temporarily shuttered in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait and a dozen other countries in the summer of 2013 due to what Smith, the former ambassador to Riyadh, said was "absolutely" political sensitivities about Benghazi in Washington.
"There was a concern about a couple of guys from Yemen .... leaving Yemen, so we essentially were told to shut down the embassies in the whole region for several days," the former ambassador said. "We were not brought into the thought process."
The decision underscored "a shift from decentralized control and execution to centralized control of all those decisions," he said, arguing the shift damages the legitimacy of the diplomats present.
"And by the way, there was no other Western embassy closed."
The skittishness about security isn't always written down in formal orders. Instead, it often becomes clear in discussions with Washington, when officers abroad are asked questions that suggest they need to be vigilant on security.
"Some higher level supervisors feel that if anything bad happens on their watch, their careers are over - even if a security incident came totally out of the blue, even if the bad guys got a lucky shot or something," said John Naland, a career Foreign Service officer who retired in September. Naland was previously the president of the American Foreign Service Association, which acts as both a union and advocacy group.
The 2012 death of Stevens in Benghazi was the first of an American ambassador since Arnold Raphel, who died in a plane crash in Pakistan in 1988. But his death was not unprecedented.
In the 11 years from 1968 to 1979, five American ambassadors were killed by militants in a particularly brutal stretch of incidents spanning from Afghanistan to Guatemala.
A plaque in the lobby of the State Department's headquarters in Foggy Bottom lists the names of 247 people who died "under heroic or tragic circumstances" while serving as diplomats or consular officers.
The job "has always come with risk, which we are fully prepared to accept," said Barbara Stephenson, the head of the American Foreign Service Association and a 30-year veteran of the Foreign Service.
"What we ask in return is a dedicated effort to mitigate danger where possible," she added, "including through providing the resources needed to accomplish our mission safely while serving abroad."
Every person contacted by The Hill for this story insisted that diplomats understand the dangers of the job and accept them willingly.
"These things are cyclical" said Patricia Butenis, a longtime diplomat who retired last year after serving in a number of overseas posts, most recently as ambassador to Sri Lanka.
"We go through this throughout a career," she added. "Something happens, somebody horribly dies. Yes, you want accountability, you want lessons learned - 'What could we have done better?' - but at the end of the day it remains a dangerous profession."
Yet some worry that the apprehensive climate created by Benghazi won't recede as quickly.
On Capitol Hill, the Benghazi Committee continues to investigate the attack and plans to issue a formal report in coming months.
Jamal Ware, a spokesman for the House Benghazi Committee's Republican majority, said the report that the panel plans to release could include "potential solutions" to the security dilemma.
"Committee Republicans are working to fully understand what happened before, during and after the Benghazi attacks to ensure America does everything it can to keep this kind of tragedy from happening again," Ware said in an email, "so we certainly are interested in hearing any concerns about State Department's management of security issues directly from its employees."
Schiff and Democrats, however, have criticized the panel as being more about torpedoing Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign - raising questions about whether it can offer a way forward in balancing the foreign service's handling of security versus diplomacy.
"Rightly or wrongly, it has become a political issue for the Republicans," said Neumann, the former ambassador to Afghanistan, who has been appointed to top posts by presidents of both parties.
"But I think it has made the issue of casualties so sensitive that that may carry over into the next administration - whichever party it is."
This administration is deliberately crippling whatever intelligence we might be able to collect.
One of the things a new president will have to do is clean out the State department and staff it with people who act in the interests of the United States.
DC needs to be gutted and much of Congress shown the door. Same with the SC.
The State Department is riddled with career staffers and diplomats who swing on the left side of the jungle. They’ve been like this for decades. They will be very difficult to get rid of.
Basically, under obama any ambassador is subject to sacrifice for political gains.
State Department employees now know they work for a government that will not have their backs when they are in danger in a foreign country.
what a load.
Oh, please....let me help Braindead Dems w/ that:
WRT Obama/Hillary's gun-running (Fast and Furious and so on): When Putin finds out that US arms that were sent on a circuitous route from Venezuela to Benghazi to Syria to overthrow Assad, Putin can go to the Hague and diplomatically demand action be brought against the Government of the United States...including every House and Senator and government official that was involved in this... (And that goes for Obama and Hillary, as well.)
There you go... security AND diplomacy ... all rolled into one.
================================================
WHAT DID THE CONGRESS KNOW ABOUT GUN-RUNNING? Read on.
SOURCE: http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rsat/c14027.htm
CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION OF ARMS TRANSFERS
Third party transfers are subject to requirements for Congressional notification under AECA, §3(d) (reference (c)), using guidelines similar to those for AECA, §36(b) (reference (c)) notifications (see Chapter 5, section C5.6).
A 30-day prior Congressional notification is required for third-party transfer requests that involve defense articles and services with original acquisition values that fall in one of the following categories: Major Defense Equipment (MDE) with an acquisition value equal to or greater than $14,000,000 for non-North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) recipients and $25,000,000 if the recipient is a member of NATO, Australia, Israel, Japan, New Zealand or Republic of Korea; or any other defense article or related training or defense service with an acquisition value of $50,000,000 or more for non-NATO recipients and $100,000,000 or more for NATO, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand recipients.
Approval is granted after the 30-day (including weekends) period has expired if no objections are raised.
I am reminded of a set of lyrics from the legendary Frank Zappa:
We are millions and millions, we're comin' to getcha
We're protected by unions, so don't let it upset ya,
Can't escape the conclusion that it's probably God's will
that civilization will grind to a standstill,
And we are the people who will make it all happen
while your children are sleepin' and your puppy is crappin'
You might call us 'flakes', or something else you might coin us,
we know you're so greedy that you'll probably join us...
The million dollar question is, Is it worth it to Obama/Clintons/McCain starting a REAL fighting war with Putin when Putin gets close to the evidence of FFII?
You know Putin has the intel but he has to put his hands on the evidence. Where is that evidence located? Northern Syria or Turkey?
I am having trouble understanding all the reluctance to going oversea.
Obama promised us the world was going to love us.
AND he put someone in charge who would answer that 3AM phone call.
I really hope to see Hillary! as the Dem Candidate against Trump.
Even if the debates have to be conducted from somewhere inside a prison.
Ask NSA-—they know everything.
Who would volunteer to go to a post where, when under attack, you would be abandoned by a drunk Sec of State and a so-called POTUS more interested in fund raising?
I honestly don't know how they recruit Foreign Service or Military personnel under this regime.
John, I'm telling you I'm really scared man. These guys are killers. Clinton won't even answer my calls about beefing up security. Can you help us? .... John? John?
We’re supposed to believe something will happen to Hillary with this scandal? Is Trey still huffing and puffing?
A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged.
Her victory vid where she throws up her arms is very Nixonesque.
The most”frustrating” thing for a diplomat is to “not be able to do anything?” I would think the most frustrating thing would be getting tortured, dragged through the streets and killed. Like when Hillary The Cold and Joyless was Secretary of State
Only Nixon was battling communist traitors from within, and Hillary was one of them.
_____________________________
I can't take it anymore. If one more person sends me that e-mail about Hillary and the Black Panthers, I'll have to be dragged away screaming in a straitjacket.
You know the e-mail I'm talking about. It accuses Hillary of helping the Black Panthers get away with torture and murder during the early 1970s. With the 2004 presidential race drawing near, the spam mills are creaking to life, flooding the Internet once more with this agitprop classic.
Unfortunately, the e-mail mingles good information with bad, sowing more confusion than enlightenment. Some versions, for instance, carry the byline of radio talk jock Paul Harvey, who says he did not write it. Such misrepresentations help Hillary defenders dismiss the e-mail as a hoax.
The story is no hoax, though. Its basic elements can be found in respected Hillary biographies and exposes such as Barbara Olson's "Hell to Pay," David Brock's "The Seduction of Hillary Rodham," Joyce Milton's "The First Partner" and Carl Limbacher's "Hillary's Scheme."
Here are the facts:
In May 1969, fishermen discovered the body of Black Panther Alex Rackley floating in Connecticut's Coginchaug River. Rackley's captors had clubbed him, burned him with cigarettes, scalded him with boiling water and stabbed him with an ice pick before finally shooting him in the head.
New Haven detectives learned that the Panthers suspected Rackley of being a police informer. Panther enforcers had tied him to a chair and tortured him for hours. Police arrested eight Panthers and later extradited Panther leader Bobby Seale from California, after a witness accused Seale of ordering Rackley's death. (1)
Campus radicals supported the Panthers. They organized mass protests in support of the so-called "New Haven Nine." Hillary was right in the thick of it.
By the time she entered Yale Law School in 1969, Hillary was already a radical celebrity on campus. Life magazine had featured Hillary in a piece titled, "The Class of '69," which showcased three student activists whom Life's editors deemed the best and brightest of the year. A line Hillary used in her Wellesley College commencement speech appeared under her photo: "Protest is an attempt to forge an identity." (2)
At Yale, Hillary helped edit the Yale Review of Law and Social Action -- a left-wing journal which promoted cop-killing and featured cartoons of pig-faced police. (3)
A series of hard-Left mentors introduced Hillary to the brass-knuckle realities of revolutionary activism. As a Wellesley undergraduate, she met and interviewed radical organizer Saul Alinsky, whose Machiavellian tactics she admired. Hillary's senior thesis supported Alinsky's call for class warfare. (4)
At Yale, Hillary found a new Svengali in the form of left-wing law professor Thomas Emerson, known around campus as "Tommy the Commie." Emerson recruited Hillary and other students to help monitor the trial of the New Haven Nine for civil rights violations. Hillary took charge of the operation, scheduling the students in shifts, so that student monitors would always be present in the courtroom. She befriended and worked closely with Panther lawyer Charles Garry. (5)
Some believe that the enormous pressure exerted by the Left helped ensure light sentences for the New Haven Nine. Whether or not this is true, the punishments were mild.
"Only one of the killers was still in prison in 1977," reports John McCaslin in the Washington Times. "The gunman, Warren Kimbro, got a Harvard scholarship and became an assistant dean at Eastern Connecticut State College. Ericka Huggins, who boiled the water for Mr. Rackley's torture, got elected to a California school board." (6)
Hillary's defenders argue that she played no "significant" role in the New Haven Nine's defense. This is semantic hairsplitting. Obviously, Hillary was less "significant" than Charles Garry or "Tommy the Commie" Emerson. But Hillary served as a trusted lieutenant to these movers and shakers. Moreover, she had a national profile as a campus activist. Hillary was no rank-and-file student protester, as her apologists claim.
Indeed, Hillary's work for the Panthers won her a summer internship at the Berkeley office of attorney Robert Treuhaft in 1972. A hardline Stalinist, Treuhaft had quit the Communist Party in 1958 only because it was losing members and no longer provided a good platform for his activism. (7) "Treuhaft is a man who dedicated his entire legal career to advancing the agenda of the Soviet Communist Party and the KGB," notes historian Stephen Schwartz. (8)
The defense of the New Haven Nine marked Hillary's initiation into the sinister underworld of the hard-core, revolutionary Left. To my knowledge, Hillary has never publicly renounced nor apologized for her role in that movement.
Richard Poe is a New York Times best-selling author and cyberjournalist. For more information on Poe and his writings, visit his Web site, RichardPoe.com. He may be reached at richardpoe@....
References
1. Joyce Milton, The First Partner: Hillary Rodham Clinton. William, Morrow and Company, Inc., New York, 1999, p. 35. Barbara Olson, Hell to Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Regnery Publishing, Washington, D.C., 1999, p. 55.
2. Milton, 1999, p. 34; Olson, 1999, pp. 40-45.
3. Olson, 1999, p. 59-61; Evan Gahr, "Hillary and the Cop-Bashers: Will the Real Ms. Rodham Please Stand Up?" JewishWorldReview.com, June 20, 2000.
4. David Brock, The Seduction of Hillary Rodham. The Free Press, New York, 1996, pp. 14-17; Olson, 1999, pp. 46, 48, 50.
5. Milton, 1999, p. 17; Brock, 1996, pp. 31-32; Olson, 1999, p. 54-56.
6. John McCaslin, "Hillary for the Defense." Inside the Beltway, The Washington Times, June 12, 1998, p. A9.
7. Olson, 1999, pp. 56-57.
8. Brock, 1996, p. 33.
http://www.legaled.com/hillaryatyale.htm
_____________________________
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.