So by now, many of you may be wondering why we would publish U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens’ Benghazi diary. In our post, we mentioned that this is a professional journal, written by an employee of the U.S. Government – a public servant. We stated our reasons for publishing it: “(the diary) has clear journalistic value and contains important information relating to a clear and intentional cover up.”

Benghazi was a place where we lost some fine members of the Special Operations community, a dear friend…four great men. We want to see that there are no more Benghazis. And there are quite a few people who wish we’d just let this thing die. 

That said, we want to get your feedback here in the relative ‘safety’ of Team Room. What did you think of the post? Where we right to publish it? Do you take issue with that? Did we present the information in a fitting manner? Did we honor Ambassador Stevens, or are we sensationalizing the matter?

We chose to partner with another publisher – – because we wanted to publicize this content and get it in front of more readers. But why Maxim? Because they tend to serve content that’s interesting to our demographic, and importantly, because they are non-political. I know that the choice seems odd at first glance, Maxim is not a ‘news’ website, but, by being non-political, we can put this in front of people without a ‘political’ agenda. Thoughts on that?

How did you feel when reading the article? Did you get the sense of being there, next to Chris, understanding his thinking? Did it help you understand the issues, and the reasons why we so tenaciously dig and claw for the truth?

And how did you feel reading those four simple words: “Never ending security threats…”

Never Ending Security Threats