Ianus so concerned about the lives of Americans. How about assassination of Amb. Davies?

Submitted by Caleb (United States), Sep 3, 2010 at 19:18

Ianus, your concern for the lives of Americans is rather selective. You have overlooked the assassination, within the embassy building, of US Ambassador Rodger Davies on August 19, 1974 by snipers firing **armor piercing bullets**, clearly indicating a military force. Here a partial account of that dastardly crime... "Shortly before 1 p.m., the embassy building came under attack from automatic rifles firing armor-piercing 7.62-mm. bullets. The marksmen, stationed in a partially constructed apartment house 75 yds. away and at the base of a hill 100 yds. away, were obviously after the ambassador himself, and they carefully aimed at the two spots where he would most likely be, his office on the building's south side and his bedroom on the north side. Though the emergency plan in case of attack called for Davies to hide himself in his bathroom, the safest niche in the embassy, he remained with his staff. Gunfire raked both sides of the building. One high-velocity bullet ripped through the shutters of his office, went through three open-doors, down a long hallway and struck him in the chest. He dropped to the floor with a groan, his gas mask half off his face, blood gushing from his wound. A Maronite Cypriot receptionist, Antoinette Varnava, rushed to his side. A second bullet blew off her head." Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,943727,00.html#ixzz0yVj9bkan

Perhaps the poor performance of the Cypriot National Guard, as large in size as the task force of the Turkish Army and fighting on its own territory, is better explained by its being more skilled at massacre of unarmed villagers and assassination of diplomats than operating against another army, rather than any inferiority in **materiel**.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".