Is that true that Stevens wanted NON-Military security??
I wish people on our team would recognize that Stevens has almost nothing to do with the Benghazi story (except winding up dead).
He wasn't "murdered", he wasn't the objective, his death was an accident.
IT'S THE "ANNEX" that the Benghazi enemy operation was about. More precisely, it's a building there (there were 5) subsequently called the "warehouse".
There WAS a "demonstration" at Stevens' residence (not a "consulate"), but it was a demonstration in the military sense, meant to draw defenders away from the target - which it did. The enemy soldiers at Stevens' residence got sucked into an unexpected firefight, which set the building on fire, and he suffocated.
At the "annex", there were at least 30 Americans, maybe more. After the "warehouse" was overrun, they were defended at an unknown location until they, some of them wounded, could be evacuated the next day, after which they disappeared.
The key questions about Benghazi are:
1) What was the purpose of the American base in Benghazi now called the "annex"?
2) Who was the senior officer or official present there?
3) Was this a rendition or interrogation site, and, if so, who was being held there that night?
4) What was stored in the "warehouse"?
5) What are the names, service branches or agencies, and duties of the 30+ Americans evacuated the next morning, and where are they now?
Poor Stevens is a sideshow, perfect boob bait for the Stupid Party.
I don’t know if it’s TRUE, but it’s what several Dem congressmen & State employees have said in response to GOP remarks about the recent Benghazi “report.” And it has been reported on Fox. (Therefore, several talking heads have claimed it’s all Stevens’ fault.)
Stevens was said to have “refused” additional “military” security; purportedly, he wanted “State Deptartment security.” Anyone know what that is?
To my knowledge, Stevens’ purported preference for the nonmilitary assets wasn’t made public until last week.