BRIAN ROSS REPORTS
- Like Jay-Z + the Beatles, But Worse
- Update: Help for Homeless Children
- Bush Era, Revised -- and with More Barbeque
- The Tax Woman Cometh
- Paging Mr. Stanford: Antigua Called
- Who Are You Calling Partisan?
- Update: IRS Won't Use Private Debt Collectors
- But Is It Art?
- PMA Scandal a Sore Point for Dems in 2010?
- Down in Flames
- A New Mystery for RNC Chief
- PMA Clients Were Big Givers
- Raided Lobby Firm Still a Force on Capitol Hill
- Stanford Update: Another $143 Mil Found
- Cheney, Hooked on Controversy
TOP BLOTTER CATEGORIES
- Abramoff Lobbying Scandal
- American Al Qaeda
- Avian Flu
- Beirut Hospital Out of Gas
- Cheney
- CIA
- CIA Secret Prisons
- D.C. Madam Affair
- FBI
- Federal Air Marshal Service
- Homeland Security
- Hurricane Katrina
- IRS
- Mark Foley Internet Scandal
- Millionaire Sex Scandal
- Nigerian E-mail Scams
- Norman Hsu, Clinton Fundraiser
- NSA: Wiretapping
- Osama bin Laden
- Payola
- Pharmacy Investigation
- PMA
- Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert
- Stanford
- Steele
- Terror
- Troopergate
- U.K. Airline Terror Plot
- U.K. Bombing Attempts
- Wen Ho Lee
- William Jefferson
- Zarqawi
« Previous | Main | Next »
U.S. Kills Plans to Build Embassy in Hezbollah Area of Beirut
Email
Print
ShareJuly 25, 2007 4:14 PM
The Blotter has learned that plans for a controversial new U.S. Embassy in Beirut have been put on hold indefinitely, and effectively killed, according to a U.S. State Department spokesperson.
The news came just hours after we reported the State Department had been pushing ahead with plans to build the new embassy in a part of Beirut controlled by the militant anti-American group Hezbollah, despite strong protests from the U.S. ambassador in Lebanon.
A U.S. official tells the Blotter on ABCNews.com that Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman, in a May 31, 2007 classified cable to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, registered his strong objections, saying his staff "unanimously opposes construction" of the embassy on the proposed site.
Photos What Was the Controversy Behind Plans to Build a U.S. Embassy in Beirut?
Feltman also said in the cable that his local staff would be "an easy target" for Hezbollah and that U.S. diplomats would "be under siege" during any conflict.
Hezbollah is believed to be behind two attacks on the U.S. Embassy and an embassy annex in 1983 and 1984 that led to the deaths of 87 people, including eight CIA employees.
Last week, the National Intelligence Estimate on threats to national security cited Hezbollah, closely aligned with Iran, as a group that could potentially attack the United States.
U.S. officials say the proposed embassy site is just a few hundred yards from the scene of fierce fighting last summer between Hezbollah and Israeli forces.
Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.
"It boggles the mind," says former State Department security official Tony Diebler. "Any reasonable person that looks at that site, does their homework and sees who controls the area would determine that it's a foolish, dangerous idea to build the embassy there," Diebler said in an interview to be broadcast on ABC News' "World News With Charles Gibson."
But officials say the State Department official in charge of embassy construction, Maj. Gen. Charles Williams (RET) is insisting the embassy be built on the site, which was purchased by the U.S. two years ago for more than $22 million.
In his cable to Secretary Rice, Ambassador Feltman said Gen. Williams maintained it was important to proceed with the proposed site in Baabda area of Beirut because of "the Department's relations with Congress and our global building objectives."
Gen. Williams declined requests from ABCNews.com to comment.
U.S. officials say Williams has ignored how conditions have changed in Beirut since the 2006 Israeli-Hezbollah war.
The officials say Hezbollah, not the government of Lebanon, controls the Baabda area and could sever access to the area at will.
State Department officials say they have been advised by the U.S. military that had the embassy been located at the Baabda site during the summer war, the U.S. military would have only come in once to evacuate the staff.
"Anytime Hezbollah wants to shut the place down," said former State Department security official Diebler, "they're capable of doing it and the loss of life would be tremendous."
The dispute between the U.S. Embassy in Beirut and the State Department in Washington has been simmering since late last year.
At one point, the U.S. Embassy refused to allow a State Department official from Washington, James Golden, managing director of the Emergency Projects Coordinating Office, permission to enter the country for the embassy project by denying normally standard "country clearance."
This post has been updated.
Do you have a tip for Brian Ross and the Investigative Team?
July 25, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (53)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
That is really stupid...can you ka-boom?
Posted by: Jazz | Jul 25, 2007 5:00:09 PM
They obviously have some agenda to fulfill. Our buildings, our people or our money, nothing matters. The Bush govt. might be dumb but once in a while even a bushman gets to see the face on inteligence.
Posted by: KILROY | Jul 25, 2007 5:18:18 PM
If there is a dumber idea for wasting taxpayer money, I don't know what it would be. Are we that interested in providing a new target for the Islamic radicals to destroy? Or take over for their own us when they prevent our personnel from occupying it?
Posted by: Jim Andrews | Jul 25, 2007 5:22:52 PM
"Hey Bob, you've always wanted an out-of-country assignment, well have I got the place for you..."
Posted by: yehork | Jul 25, 2007 5:36:05 PM
Common sense and not common valor; apparently, is the requirement not needed for being hired by these idiots in that particular section of the State Department. Can you say Custard's last stand? So who wants to be volunteer to be first in line to be cannon fodder?
Posted by: Lee Henry | Jul 25, 2007 5:36:09 PM
One might assume that there is some other reason (classified?) why our military folks want the embassy in that location.
I am confident that Brian Ross and his crack team will get their hands on (and disclose) the classified data in the near future...
Posted by: jim jones | Jul 25, 2007 5:48:07 PM
This will help get us into that fight with IRAN they all want up there in WDC. Start building an embassy, they bomb it like they know they will and slick as a whistle we have a reason to attack IRAN that the people can get behind.
Posted by: aboe | Jul 25, 2007 5:49:20 PM
As they say in Real Estate - LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION - At least we will know who will attack us. Since ambassadors are political appointees this posting will have to be someone who really pissed off the President - although it will fall to the next administration if it is Hillary it will give her a great spot to ship Bill off to.
Posted by: Gene | Jul 25, 2007 6:01:30 PM
And the terrorists are already contemplating where the best place would be to drive the truck bomb. What fool would deliberately put our troops in harms way for the sole purpose of antagonizing a region of the world that doesn't want us there? And who will be the first near sighted person to ask "why do they hate us?" when the inevitable attack on this embassy and our soldiers guarding it are attacked??
We don't learn much from our previous mistakes do we?!
Posted by: Kid Charlemagne | Jul 25, 2007 6:06:21 PM
Why the hell are we trying to build embassies in countries that are not supportive of the Bush Adminstration.
Of course that kind of thinking would prohibit our building in just about every major AND minor country on earth...hehehehe
Posted by: Leprkin | Jul 25, 2007 6:30:25 PM
But that's the idea...a veritable bonanza for military contractors, especially those responsible for security before, during and after the construction (and inevitable destruction). Just another blatant money grab to reward the loyal subjects of Shrub and Angler.
Posted by: JL | Jul 25, 2007 6:32:34 PM
Madness or what! Who is the genius that came up with this hair-brained idea?
Posted by: Jeff Rudd | Jul 25, 2007 7:35:38 PM
It would have been glorious....
Posted by: Dave | Jul 25, 2007 7:35:38 PM
WUssssssssssies...wussssssieeeees
Posted by: dave | Jul 25, 2007 7:37:28 PM
If ABC got it wrong, then why didn't the State Department just come out and say that, instead of putting the project on hold indefinitely?
Posted by: Pete | Jul 25, 2007 7:40:13 PM
ABC should go after the Secretary of State and find out who is advocating this stupid move.
Posted by: voter | Jul 25, 2007 7:54:20 PM
Stomp out Hizbullah now....while we still can.
Posted by: dave | Jul 25, 2007 7:55:56 PM
You are not a friend of the United States.
Posted by: gsfoley | Jul 25, 2007 7:56:44 PM
Ask Dr. Zawahiri why he hides out in a cave in a remote corner of the world. Bring him to me.
Posted by: dave | Jul 25, 2007 7:57:13 PM
I think our currant Government Administration (Pres. Bush, ie) has and is still making shameful decisions. He will go down in history that way also. Bill Who? Oh, the guy who was almost impeached for denying diddling Monica.... Wow, doesn't seem so important now does it? But, then although I was a registered Republican, I never voted for Geo. Bush, I was terribly afraid of his decision making capabilities. Well, I was right about that. Keep it up Brian, please do your best to be an expliary American citizen by informing the people of the truth, as much as you can get to, anyway. Thanks for your reporting. Buying that property in Hezbollah for millions,,, of course, while we taxpayers just shell out for the Administration's faux pas. That's right when someone spoke about the variable $$$ bonanza for the military contractors,,, such as Hallyburton. Our extremely injured soldiers can't even have decent medical care when they come home. Boy oh boy. Something is terribly wrong with those in charge of the leadership of our country.
Posted by: Paula Farris | Jul 25, 2007 9:13:11 PM
Post a comment
