Benghazi, Libya

A BOYISH-LOOKING AMERICAN DIPLOMAT was meeting for the first time with the Islamist leaders of eastern Libya’s most formidable militias.

It was Sept. 9, 2012. Gathered on folding chairs in a banquet hall by the Mediterranean, the Libyans warned of rising threats against Americans from extremists in Benghazi. One militia leader, with a long beard and mismatched military fatigues, mentioned time in exile in Afghanistan. An American guard discreetly touched his gun.

“Since Benghazi isn’t safe, it is better for you to leave now,” Mohamed al-Gharabi, the leader of the Rafallah al-Sehati Brigade, later recalled telling the Americans. “I specifically told the Americans myself that we hoped that they would leave Benghazi as soon as possible.”

Yet as the militiamen snacked on Twinkie-style cakes with their American guests, they also gushed about their gratitude for President Obama’s support in their uprising against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi. They emphasized that they wanted to build a partnership with the United States, especially in the form of more investment. They specifically asked for Benghazi outlets of McDonald’s and KFC.

The diplomat, David McFarland, a former congressional aide who had never before met with a Libyan militia leader, left feeling agitated, according to colleagues. But the meeting did not shake his faith in the prospects for deeper involvement in Libya. Two days later, he summarized the meeting in a cable to Washington, describing a mixed message from the militia leaders.

Despite “growing problems with security,” he wrote, the fighters wanted the United States to become more engaged “by ‘pressuring’ American businesses to invest in Benghazi.”

The cable, dated Sept. 11, 2012, was sent over the name of Mr. McFarland’s boss, Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.

Later that day, Mr. Stevens was dead, killed with three other Americans in Benghazi in the most significant attack on United States property in 11 years, since Sept. 11, 2001.

CONTINUE READING: A Deadly Mix in Benghazi – The New York Times.

One is hard-pressed to find actual examples of investigative journalism these days. This in-depth article goes beyond the sensational and the political. Sadly, I suspect that the people who should read it will not. They will just get the highly filtered version from their favored pundits, who are far from true journalists. 

2 thoughts on “A Deadly Mix in Benghazi – The New York Times

  1. Or they’ll just think NYT is a part of a cover-up. I seriously doubt Benghazi will disappear from their talking points anytime before 2017 – unless they find a new “scandal” to get excited about.

  2. Amaya, thanks for sharing this story and link. It shows how “murky” our involvement is and how easily and fast things can change. We have a long way to go to build any credibility, but we must continue to try. Benghazi will not disappear as an issue, as the GOP wants to have it as a lever against Hillary Clinton should she run for President. This is one of the reasons they delayed in bringing in Admiral Mullens and Ambassador Pickering who wrote a report last December on their Benghazi findings who should have been given as much air time as possible, rather than politicians. The NY Times is very believable. Take care, BTG

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s