Amb. Stevens' father wants politics out of his son's death

Chris Stevens speaks to local media at the Tibesty Hotel in Benghazi, Libya on April 11, 2011. Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, was killed in an attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi on Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2012. / AP Photo/Ben Curtis

The father of Chris Stevens, the slain U.S. Ambassador to Libya, said he does not want the death of his son to become part of campaign-season politics.

"It would really be abhorrent to make this into a campaign issue," Jan Stevens told Bloomberg News in a telephone interview.

Stevens added that he thought his son's death is being "adequately investigated."

"We don't pretend to be experts in security. It has to be objectively examined. That's where it belongs. It does not belong in the campaign arena," said Stevens, 77, an attorney and registered Democrat.

The Romney campaign has sought to highlight the Libya attacks, raising the issue on the campaign trail, as evidence of President Obama's failing foreign policy.

• Romney: Biden "doubling down on denial" on Libya attack response
  
• Biden on Ryan's Libya comments: "That's a bunch of malarkey"

At last week's vice presidential debate, Vice President Joe Biden was asked about the administration's response. He said the White House wasn't told about a need for more security and he criticized Rep. Paul Ryan for wanting to cut $300 million from embassy security.

The issue continues to percolate as it became a central topic on the Sunday political shows. On CBS News' "Face the Nation," Senator Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said the Obama administration is "misleading" the American public or is "incredibly incompetent.

On CNN's "State of the Union," Mr. Obama's adviser, Robert Gibbs, said the Romney campaign needs to "stop playing politics with this issue."

Immediately after the September 11th attacks that killed four Americans including the ambassador, The Obama administration blamed an American-made anti-Muslim video that sparked protests across the Middle East. The president has since called it a terrorist attack and an investigation is ongoing.

"I'm not sure exactly what he's been saying and not saying, but our position is it would be a real shame if this were politicized," Stevens said told Bloomberg News, referring to Romney. "Our concern now is memorializing Chris and remembering his contribution to the country."

[AllCatsWelcome]

Well, I guess you were wrong. It was a cover up. Did you just hear the breaking news. We need to stop protecting the Obama Administration and get to the bottom of this. Someone lied. This is horrific. The Ambassador was asking for help 30 - 45 days before 911 and NO ONE HELPED HIM! What is wrong with the people up in Washington. This is insane.

[seethelight]

Romney, Ryan, the U.S. House Republicans, and others in the TGOP are trying to turning an issue of how to prevent a reoccurrence of the Benghazi tragedy into an attack on President Obama, pure and simple. The whole issue has now become a concerted TEA/GOP effort to score political points by politicizing this tragedy.

To take this tragedy and turn it into an attack on President Obama and a negative narrative about President Obama's foreign policy is absurd. When compared to the 1983 terrorist bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon which killed 241 Marines when Ronald Reagan was President, the Benghazi tragedy is a substantially less egregious oversight in discovering and recognizing a terrorist threat . The Democrats didn't use the Beirut disaster as an indictment of Reagan or his foreign policy at that time and I'll bet other Americans didn't either.

The murder of the U.S. Ambassador and the three other Americans is a terrible tragedy and the perpetrators must be brought to justice. The lessons learned should be put to use to prevent a similar tragedy in the future. The U.S. Department of State is conducting an investigation, headed by Thomas Pickering and former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mullens. This is the investigation which will give us the answers to prevent this type of tragedy in the future, not the fully politicized rants of partisans.

Let's please put this Benghazi act of terror in a rational perspective, free of politics. The United States has had at least 10,000 citizens(combatants & civilians) killed in terror attacks and in the 'war on terror' in the past eleven years. The battle against terror will continue and, unfortunately, it is likely there will be more tragedy as the battle continues into the future.

[hester1806]

I can understand Mr. Stevens' feelings, BUT his son's death became political when the Obama administration first went with the "riot about a film" narrative despite all evidence to the contrary. This was no fog of war lapse. This was a calculated political decision in a tight election race. I voted for Obama, but how this whole event and its aftermath has been handled by his administration is very troubling.

[Mick_from_Amsterdam]

First, chev...

I wish to thank you for continually reposting comments you find particularly offensive or damaging...

Hard to find with this new CBS format...

I accept the compliment of being among those selected for your Rush-like scorn...

And I understand (but connot forgive) the ardor that causes you and your reich-wing ilk to condone any foul means as being necessary for, "The Greater Good"...

Ridding the White House of (must I say it?) a BLACK MAN!

[Mick_from_Amsterdam]

ROCKYI941 says: HE MUST BE A DIE HARD DEMOCRAT TO EXCUSE GROSS INCOMPETENCE BY THIS ADMINISTRATION

******************************

Yeah, Rock...

He's just some Lib/Dem trying to ruin a perfectly good opportunity for the GOP to scavenge a few votes...

Just because he's still all hung up on that dead son thing!

[MomsHugs]

Mr. Stevens ~ My condolences for the loss of your son, which must be unbearable to you and your family. May you all find peace in due time. ~ Hugs, Moms

[rationall7]

What gets me is that people on the other side have the gull to say that the first report was a cover-up that later was corrected somewhere around a couple weeks later. Bush claimed Iraq has WMD's and had over a year to make a correction and that is after the UN Inspectors had made their investagation. Bush covered his lie by frabicating more lies at the UN that ended with a ten year war, over 3,500 military people dead and trillion dollar debt to China. Come on, what kind of cover up are you ranting about?

[Veteran_Homeowner]

Everyone overseas knew Saddam had WMD's..do you think he was going to keep them out in the open and make it easy for when the inspectors finally did make it in to inspect they would be able to find them. Saddam was a very smart man. You don't don't have to be a democrat or a republican to figure that one out you just have to be able to think strategically.

[ber-ber24]

Saddam DID HAVE WMD's!!! Did you have your head in the sand when the media were showing the pictures of the people of whole Kurdish villages lying in the streets with blisters and sores on them from where he had sprayed them with chemical weapons. People seem to think WMD's ONLY mean nuclear weapons, but it also means chemical weapons. HE had them, and even the media knows it. They just don't want anyone to remember, so they won't pull out the videos for anyone to see. Either Saddam hid them very well in the desert somewhere, or, more than likely, he sold them to his neighbors---like Syria (who we do know for a fact has chemical weapons)--to pay for the war against the U.S.

[zenia5]

It is very sad that Republicans are politicizing this tragic event. It is being investigated as it should be and hopefully the truth will come out.

I wonder if the rightwingnut Obama-haters were just as outraged over the discovery that George Bush was asleep at the wheel when over 3,000 people were killed on 9-11 eleven years ago. The following recent article gives chilling details of the numerous warnings Bush and his administration received and IGNORED...and covered up for eleven years:

"(CBS News) Eleven years after the 9/11 attacks, there is new information on what the George W. Bush administration knew about al-Qaeda's plans. Tuesday in the New York Times, investigative reporter Kurt Eichenwald says the White House received ominous warnings as early as May 2001.

CBS News spoke with Eichenwald Monday. He said, "What I've been able to see are the presidential daily briefs before August 6 of 2001. And they're horrific, and they are - our reports are 'an attack is coming,' 'there are going to be mass casualties.' The worst of them, the Pentagon, the neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, as the CIA was coming in saying, 'al-Qaeda's going to attack,' said, 'Oh, this is just a false flag operation. Bin laden is trying to take our attention off of the real threat, Iraq.'

And so there are presidential daily briefs that are literally saying, 'No they're wrong, this isn't fake, it's real.'"


Eichenwald further stated, "Actually, the counterterrorist center of the CIA did a spectacular job, and that's what really comes down. You know, in the aftermath, the White House and others said, 'Well they didn't tell us enough." No, they told them everything they needed to know to go on a full alert and the White House didn't do it."

George Bush was asleep at the wheel.....and the rest is history.

Before you say it, I KNOW Bush is not running for President; HOWEVER, if you were not just as outraged at this coverup, then you should not consider yourselves judge and jury now.

[MTATL670]

Republicans would politicize girl scouts and puppies if they thought it would help them win

[ber-ber24]

And the poor, innocent Democrats wouldn't???? The Democrats have taken the stakes way further than just politicizing things. They've been using Taxpayer Dollars---not anything out of their own campaigns or personal finances, cause they don't care about the poor THAT much--but money from the pockets of all the people who pay taxes in this country to BUY the votes of the poor for decades, now.
The poor will keeping selling their votes to the Democrats, as long as they continue to get their "free" stuff, and no one can truly speak out against it, because the words get manipulated so easily into sounding like the person speaking out doesn't care at all for the plight of the poor. This makes for a perfectly deceitful and evil plan to buy elections, and the Democrats have been using it for decades, now.

[MontanaGrandma]

If there had not been an outcry, would anything have come to light? Would the truth have come out, or would it be covered up with a video someone posted. The death of the Ambassador is a concern for all of us and a concern for all those serving now, and in the future, in Embassies.