a solution to the stevens paradox

Tarpley and other conspiracy-minded persons have been wrestling with the question of why, if Stevens was the sort of devious US ambassador whose real job is organising death squads, such a squad should have killed him. The apparent incomprehensibility of this encourages such writers as Finian Cunningham to say, no, he was killed by Gaddafi loyalists after all. But consider the story that Stevens was gay. Is it not highly probable, and not without precedent, that he was mixing business with pleasure, one thing to which strict religious death squads could very well be expected to take lethal exception? This would also explain how they knew the location of the safe house.


  1. lafayettesennacherib
    Posted September 21, 2012 at 7:34 pm | Permalink

    Strike’s me that it’s a strange type of heterosexual who can achieve an erection for the purpose of sodomising a dead guy.

  2. hp
    Posted September 22, 2012 at 12:10 am | Permalink

    How could this not be the first thing which springs to mind?
    After that it’s all a predictable bore.

  3. hp
    Posted September 22, 2012 at 12:15 am | Permalink

    Oh, Lafayette, haha! Funny and also a glaring faux paw..

  4. lobro
    Posted September 22, 2012 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

    stevens got the same treatment he devised for gaddafi.

    for some psychos it is possible (and not all are in jails).
    it is called vigor mortis.

    besides who is to say which came first, death or death-by-sodomy?
    maybe it was just a lovers’ (s)tiff.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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