There has been much argument about the security situation in Benghazi leading up to the 2012 attacks. On the one hand, there is no dispute that additional security had been requested in the months before the attack. The timeline is important.
DECEMBER 2011:
The documents also included an “ACTION MEMO” for Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy dated December 27, 2011, and written by US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman. With the subject line: “Future of Operations in Benghazi, Libya,” the memo states: “With the full complement of five Special Agents, our permanent presence would include eight U.S. direct hire employees.”
This would seem to suggest that Undersecretary Kennedy had approved a plan for five permanent security agents in Benghazi, but that never happened. It should be noted that there were ultimately a total of five Diplomatic Security Agents in Benghazi that night since there were two stationed at the Benghazi compound, and three escorted Ambassador Chris Stevens to the compound.
FEBRUARY 2012
On February 11, 1:13 pm, Regional Security Officer of the Libyan Embassy Eric Nordstrom emails State Department officials, cc-ing then-Ambassador Gene Cretz, saying he’ll try to send personnel from the Security Support Team to Benghazi. “I’ll speak with our SST personnel to se if they can free up 1 or 2 bodies for Benghazi….While the status of Benghazi remains undefined, DS” – Diplomatic Security – “is hesitant to devout (sic) resources and as I indicated previously, this has severely hampered operations in Benghazi. That often means that DS agents are there guarding a compound with 2 other DOS personnel present. That often means that outreach and reporting is non-existent.”
Norstrom notes that the British have “a 5 person team assigned to just their head of mission, so they have made a commitment to maintain a larger presence in Benghazi than the USG,” the U.S. government.
At 8:53 pm. James Bacigalupo, the Regional Director Near East Asia Bureau of Diplomatic Security DSS for the State Department, emails Nordstrom, “Call me, I am surprised at your statement that ‘DS is hesitant to devote resources as I (you) have indicated previously that has severely limited operations in Benghazi.’”
Norstrom responds on Sunday, February 12: 8:58 pm “we have had multiple times previously had no movements in Benghazi because we had only 2 DS agents on the ground. Havingno movements for upwards for 10 days severely limits operations in Benghazi. I’ve been placed in a very difficult spot when the Ambassador tells me that I need to support Benghazi but can’t direct MSD” – Mobile Security Detachment – ” there and been advised that DS isn’t going to provide more than 3 DS agents over the long term.”
JUNE 2012
One signed by Stevens and titled “LIBYA’S FRAGILE SECURITY DETERIORIATES AS TRIBAL RIVALRIES, POWER PLAYS AND EXTREMISM INTENSIFY,” dated June 25, 2012, assess the increase in violence. ”From April to June, Libya also witnesses an increase in attacks targeting international organizations and foreign interests,” Stevens wrote, describing attacks on a United Nations official in Benghazi, International Committee for the Red Cross buildings in Benghazi and Misrata, and IED at the mission in Benghazi, and RPG fired at the British Ambassador’s convoy, and an attack on the consulate of Tunisia.
AUGUST 2012
Another cable from Stevens, titled “The Guns of August; security in eastern Libya” and dated August 8, 2012, states “Since the eve of the (July) elections, Benghazi has moved from trepidation to euphoria and back as a series of violent incidents has dominated the political landscape during the Ramadan holiday.” Stevens describes the incidents as “organized, but this is not an organized campaign.” The Supreme Security Council, the interim security force, he says, “has not coalesced into a stabilizing force and provides little deterrence.”
In August the situation in Benghazi was deteriorating rapidly:
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.
“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,” said the cable, which was first reported by Fox News.
Stevens cables Washington that Al Qaeda has camps in the area:
On August 16, 2012–a little less than a month before the terrorist attacks on the U.S. State Department and CIA facilities in Benghazi, Libya–Amb. Chris Stevens sent a cable to State Department headquarters in Washington, D.C. stating that a CIA officer on the ground in Benghazi had briefed a State Department officer in that city the day before “on the location of approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps within Benghazi.”
The scene is set. In mid-August, Benghazi is in trouble. Security is lacking. The compound cannot be defended. More security is desperately needed. And suddenly….
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 officials said.
Why on Earth would Stevens, after months of warning of the danger in Benghazi and asking for more security suddenly decline it?
Because someone told him to stand down. It almost certainly was Hillary. And on August 16, 2012.
Why? Ego and politics.
Obama had essentially overthrown Libya and he touted it as a foreign policy success in the 2012 election campaign.
President Barack Obama sought on Saturday to cast himself as a strong leader on foreign policy, highlighting a pullout from Iraq and the death of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi as success stories.
In a message Obama is likely to push in his 2012 re-election campaign, he said his leadership had made it possible to turn the page on a decade of war and refocus on bolstering the economy and paying down the national debt.
Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address that Gaddafi’s death and the announcement that all U.S. troops would be removed from Iraq this year were “powerful reminders of how we’ve renewed American leadership in the world.”
Beefing up security in Libya would be problematic- it would be seen as a failing Obama action, belying the claim of a success. And so most likely Hillary told Stevens not to ask for more security so as not to embarrass Obama.
One person familiar with the events said Stevens might have rejected the offers because there was an understanding within the State Department that officials in Libya ought not to request more security, in part because of concerns about the political fallout of seeking a larger military presence in a country that was still being touted as a foreign policy success.
“The embassy was told through back channels to not make direct requests for security,” an official familiar with the case, who agreed to discuss the case only anonymously because of the sensitivity of the subject… told McClatchy.
General Carter Ham asked Stevens why he would refuse additional security:
“He didn’t say why. He just turned it down,” a defense official who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject told McClatchy.
He wouldn’t say why? After months of seeking more security? After concluding that the compound could not be defended he refused additional security?
It makes no sense to Gregory Hicks:
Both Hicks and Ham declined to comment on the exchange between Ham and Stevens. Hicks’ lawyer, Victoria Toensing, said Hicks did not know the details of conversations between Stevens and Ham and was not aware of Stevens turning down an offer of additional security.
“As far as Mr. Hicks knows, the ambassador always wanted more security and they were both frustrated by not getting it,” she said.
The whole Obama regime story never made any sense. I’ve asked this before– how is it that “protests” over a video took place in Benghazi when virtually all the other protests took place in the capitols of nations? Why was there no “protest” in Tripoli? It makes no sense at all.
But it all does makes sense if Hillary ordered Stevens to cease and desist for political reasons. And it would explain why Stevens suddenly did a 180 and declined to explain why. It makes sense if you know Al Qaeda had camps in the are and they knew Stevens was at the compound that particular day. It also would explain why the Obama regime would be so insistent on the video nonsense. It also would explain why they put the videographer in jail. It would explain why two weeks after the attack Obama went to the UN to decry the video. All head fakes. Squirrels. All to push this off past the election and save their asses.
I don’t believe anyone has specifically asked Hillary if she told Stevens to stop asking for more security, but I’d sure as hell demand an answer from her. She’s responsible. Those men died for one reason only- Obama’s re-election. If I am on the committee investigating Benghazi I demand all communications between Benghazi and DC and Hillary and Obama on August 12, 2012. The truth is there.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
@This one: #41
As I and others have mentioned different times, conservatives have complained about some of the things Bush did, and some of the things he didn’t do. I don’t remember liberals having very many complaints against ANY democrat.
What you are not taking into consideration is the months Bush waited to go into Iraq, because he didn’t want to go in without UN approval, and the MANY convoys of trucks seen leaving Iraq during that time. He should have stopped the convoys and seen what they were taking out of the country.
By the way, your leader received the, “Lie of the year” award for 2013. Why haven’t you commented on that? We know what you would be saying if Bush received it. I don’t know how far the ward list goes, but obama should have gotten the top 20-30.