Did Ambassador Christopher Stevens seek “members of same-sex marriages” for his Libyan security team?
Ben Shapiro at TownHall says that the reason the administration lied about the nature of the attack in Libya was in order to cover up the fact that our “low profile” policy in Libya led our ambassador to go into Benghazi without a serious security team, despite the known threats.
[T]hey didn’t care. They thought it was far more important to make nice with the native population than to keep our ambassador safe. They thought that the Arab Spring was a nice, happy little uprising, complete with gay bodyguards to apply to protect the ambassador. Really. An ad placed in Libya—Libya!—for the ambassador’s security team made it clear that members of a same-sex marriage would be accepted.Shapiro does not provide any source for this astounding claim. The idea is absurd, since, of course, Muslim countries, while they have plenty of homosexuality, do not have same-sex marriage. I did some Googling, and found nothing but Shapiro’s own column. I’ve e-mailed him asking for further information.
U.S. Embassy in Libya Sought $13,000-Per-Year Bodyguards With ‘Limited’ English; But Gave Preference to Citizen ‘Same-Sex Domestic Partners’ of U.S. Gov’t EmployeesSo it appears Shapiro had it a little wrong. It wasn’t partners of same-sex “marriages” that the U.S. embassy was seeking as guards, but members of same-sex “domestic partnerships.” Further, this affirmative action outreach to homosexuals went only to U.S. citizens, not to Libyans. But at the same time the U.S. embassy said wanted people with limited English skills for the jobs. Meaning what? That the preferred guards be people of Libyan origin who had become naturalized U.S. citizens via their “domestic partnership” with a U.S. citizen yet who were still living in Libya? It’s too weird to figure out. I’ll look at the rest of the Jeffrey article tomorrow.