There are a number of Ambassadors who appear on hit lists--mainly for one reason--they represent the US just as much as the flag does. The fact that Stevens apparently rejected more security speaks more to bad judgment and hubris than it does a CIA connection. The Bureau of Diplomatic Security is responsible for ensuring that our diplomatic personnel, including Ambassadors, are provided security. In the case of Stevens it appears that he had a DS supplied personal protection detail. But they cannot protect an ambassador from the kind of attack that happened in Benghazi. The host government is responsible and they were AWOL for five hours.
I have no doubt that AQ and its affiliated organizations in Libya took out Stevens in retalliation for the US killing one its leaders. And no doubt, Obama and the Dems bragging about taking out OBL and Ghadaffi didn't help matters. And add the fact that this was the 11th anniversary of 9/11. There had to be collusion between the Libyan security personnel charged with the responsibility for protecting the Consulate (including both the government assigned personnel and the ones hired by the consulate) with the attackers. The security personnel just melted away when the attack started and someone must have let the attackers know the location the safe house that was attacked during the second phase of the attack.
For me, the larger story here is how derelict the State Department was in providing security for the consulate given conditions on the ground, i.e., recent attacks against Western interests in Benghazi such as the RPG attack against the UK ambassador in June, the Tunisian Embassy, the Red Cross, and the US consulate by an IED. The fact that the UK closed its consulate in Benghazi after the attack on the UK's ambassador's motorcade should have set off all kinds of alarm bells in Libya and in Washington.
The consulate was housed in an "interim facility" that had no more security than one would find in a gated community. The Ambassador was visiting Benghazi but we had 25 to 30 people assigned to the consulate. To me, this is totally unacceptable and should never have happened. Lives were put needlessly at risk. Heads should roll in the State Department. I have let our union, AFSA, know of my displeasure with this arrangement and asking them to hold Hillary and the rest of the leadership responsible for a major lapse in judgment. There has been a decided lack of outrage within the Department--at least publicly--for the failure to provide proper security for our personnel.
How do you know that Stevens apparently rejected more security?
RE State Dept policy on personnel protection: Doesn’t the ambassador make the call for his assigned area? Isn’t he the senior representative of the US?
Stevens must have thought he was “loved by the people” and so made a bad call regarding security for himself and the people with him.
I still question his involvement in getting armaments to the supposed freedom fighter during the takeout of gadaffi revolution. Why would they pick him? Is that usual detail for an Ambassador?
Lots still does not add up for me but if you say he probably was not CIA that means a lot to me.
are you suggesting the two Seals with him who also died may have been CIA?
Do you think any sensitive intel as to where he was at any time was leaked? And if so by whom?
I just don't trust the obama regime at all.
If you are potus and sitting in a hotel room in Vegas doing campaigning and you get the call the embassy is under fire do you go back to sleep?
Too much does not add up.
Excellent points.