• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

Is this what Benghazi was all about?

Started by Zircon, November 01, 2012, 08:26:01 AM

Zircon

Not "proof"... but, makes a lot more sense than most things I've read on the subject.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/..._alliance.html

This article is an "analysis" of the story, and contains a lot of opinions from the writer... trying to add context, and applying his thoughts about the ramifications of the news....

At the very end, there is a link labeled "Evidence", that links to this story...

http://blogs.jpost.com/content/bengh...tober-surprise

It's an interview done by the Jeruralem Post of a former CIA Agent, Claire Lopez. In the intereview is the following:

Quote:
GA: Do you believe that this was a cover up from the very beginning?

CL: Oh yes, the gun running of course, that was the thing.

GA: That was my next question; do you believe that this administration is smuggling weapons to Al-Qaeda?

CL: Well, not… I mean… The short answer is yes. They were working with the very same Al-Qaeda linked relationships in Libya to gather up and buy back and collect weapons from Gaddafi’s stock pile that were missing from the revolution in Libya last year and what it looks like is that they were shipping them onwards to Syria.

GA: Some of those weapons have already shown up in the Sinai on the southern border of Israel.

CL: Yes, they’ve gone to the Sinai and they’ve also gone to Mali and to other places in western Africa and they’ve also gone to Syria. That was the operation, that’s what they were doing.

It's a very interesting interview, with a LOT of other interesting information. Ms. Lopez is very careful in what she says... pointing out what is "known" and what is "speculation". She seemed pretty certain about this gun-running part.

Zircon

According to new info out today:

"I really believe, having read it, that it is the smoking gun warning here. You've got this emergency meeting in Benghazi, less than a month before the attack. At that briefing, the people are told that there are ten, ten, Islamic militias and al-Qaeda groups in Benghazi. The consulate can not sustain a coordinated attack and they need extra help. This information goes directly to the office of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

So, again, you have the culpability of the State Department. This is a very specific warning that they're in trouble, they need help and they see an attack on the horizon," FOX News' Catherine Herridge reported on FOX News' "On the Record" Wednesday night.

"I believe based on this cable the point that was being made, that they wanted made publicly, not just in a classified study, is that the warning that came from Benghazi was very specific. It said 'we can not withstand an attack,' the militias are everything, al-Qaeda is here. This was known to the U.S. intelligence community as well. And that they really could not see a situation where security was going to turn around. They send that it was trending negatively," Herridge further reported.

"I can't think of anything that would be more specific than if these groups had emailed the State Department and said, 'Here's the time, here's the place, and here's the method of the attack,'" she said.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...ning_here.html

Juan

Here's my question - if we were supplying al Qaeda in Syria with weapons, why did Al Qaeda attack us?

As of now, I'm more of the opinion that the reemergence of Al Qaeda simply didn't fit the narrative of "Bin Laden is Dead and GM in alive," so the administration ignored the cables.

Sardondi

I saw this bruited about a few days ago. I just don't see how not sending help was supposed to be quieter. I guess the Admin was just hoping it would all kind of work out, and that the Americans on the ground would grow wings or something.

Quote from: UFO Fill on November 01, 2012, 10:12:28 AM
Here's my question - if we were supplying al Qaeda in Syria with weapons, why did Al Qaeda attack us?

As of now, I'm more of the opinion that the reemergence of Al Qaeda simply didn't fit the narrative of "Bin Laden is Dead and GM in alive," so the administration ignored the cables.

We could open diplomatic relations with AQ and they wouldn't pause an instant in trying to destroy America. We can't project our logic onto them.

As far as why the Admin would try to deal with people that everyone else in the world knew you couldn't deal with; well, BO's 2008 campaign on foreign policy was essentially about how he would make Islam love at least him, if not the entire US. Hell, Barack was even going to make the oceans submit to his will like King Canute, remember? ("This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal....".) Looks like a lot of folks have been drinking the Kool-Aid for a long, long time.

Quote from: Sardondi on November 01, 2012, 10:55:31 AM
...We could open diplomatic relations with AQ and they wouldn't pause an instant in trying to destroy America. We can't project our logic onto them...

Can we project our logic onto Obama?  Or the Clintons?


We have a likely Muslim Brotherhood operative as the top advisor on Arab affairs to Hillary at State (is that the desk a lot of the pleas and other communication died on?).  We have Obama denying terrorism is connected to Islam.  The Ft Hood Massacre was 'workplace violence'.  We have Obama ignoring pleas from the people of Iran to simply say he stands with them.  We have Obama seemingly doing everything he can to make sure the worst groups possible ultimately end up with power in the Arab Spring countries.  We have the Benghazi incident.  One story that has been the subject of a blackout by the Corrupt Media here in the US is the significant support given to an Islamic political party in Kenya by State Senator, then US Senator, now President Obama - a party that resorted to violence in order to negotiate a share of power after they lost a national election.  We have Obama snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq and Afganistan.


On the other hand, we have the killing of Osama and the drone attacks in places like Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen.


I wonder if Obama is helping in the creation of an Islamic Calafate.  One way to avoid suspicion would be to kill a now useless to the cause Osama bin Laden, and cynically continue drone attacks in places he knows will eventually revert back to Islamic terror purveyers anyway.


As for the Clintons, they just want Hill to have her shot at the White House.  I imagine the person with the Brotherhood ties was assigned to her and she didn't realize why until it was too late.  Possibly trapped now, go along or be blamed for everything.

This is all conjecture on my part.  Filling in the blanks.  That's what happens when people are not told the truth and are lied to - they are left to speculate based on what they do know or have heard.  The fact that Obama is lying and incompetent - at best - is reason enough to fire him next week.

Zircon

Absolutely spot on with that last paragraph P*B. People "speculate" ... what the hell else would one expect people to do with spotty data?

I do think Hillary knew what was up with this MB assistant. The MB is well entrenched in our Homeland Security and even in middle east policy decisions. The caliphate you speak of is a work in progress in the middle east among the militants. The actions this administration is taking are doing nothing to quell that movement. Seems as though we've capitulated. Why? I can't see anything positive evolving out of this proto-caliphate.

Sardondi, we've been fed a continual line of this "The One", "Messiah" by the media like a line of cocaine to an addict. The intended audience are the idiots in this country - and for God's sake there are tens of millions of pathetic, slobbering, mindless drones wandering around like a mass of cows loosed for their containment. Those who embrace the enslavement of progressive liberalism. Voting by them is an act of fealty. A willingness to return to or enter for the first time onto what is now a modernized plantation.

The ridiculous thing is that the media and the administration regard ALL OF US as stupid cattle. If you don't go "moo" then you're regarded as no different than a sheet covered KKK nutjob. I've never seen the media more divisive and more obviously complicit in a political movement. It is sickening.

And anybody who challenges this like "conservative radio" does is regarded as an intolerant and by people who actually know better. The unthinking masses joined the increasing horde because if is easier to be intellectually bankrupt, let others decide for you and be irresponsible than to get your shit together, see what is occurring and fix it.

Zircon

Here we go:

According to blog site beforeitsnews.com, CIA sources have confirmed that President Barack Obama ordered military and intelligence assets not to defend or rescue ambassador Christopher Stevens as the American consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi were being attacked by terrorists last month.

Reports are also surfacing that claim White House officials, including the president, was fed real-time video footage from two aerial drones while the seven-hour long attack was underway.


If true, he's toast, either through the election, or via impeachment.

Juan

Who is this MB assistant you are talking about?  Huma?  Rumors in 2008 were that Huma was Hillary's girlfriend, so I don't think Huma is a mystery to Hillary.  Then, of course, Huma caught a little Weiner off of Anthony.


Eddie Coyle

 
          Considering how clued in the average American is, they probably think Benghazi was the guy who was in "Run For Your Life" in the 60's. There's no wider concern because the general public has returned to a pre-9/11 mindset. And frankly, many people don't view embassy workers as "regular folks", so there's a lack of empathy I believe. Are Cleo Noel or Adolph Dubs household names? Of course not...

Sardondi

Quote from: Eddie Coyle on November 02, 2012, 07:36:10 AM

          Considering how clued in the average American is, they probably think Benghazi was the guy who was in "Run For Your Life" in the 60's. ....

Okay, I get that, but I was alive then. Everybody else knows him as the bad guy in Road House, if at all. You might have finally hit your full esoterica quotient. 

Eddie Coyle

Quote from: Sardondi on November 02, 2012, 09:31:50 AM
Okay, I get that, but I was alive then. Everybody else knows him as the bad guy in Road House, if at all. You might have finally hit your full esoterica quotient.
So you think my references to Cleo Noel and Adolph Dubs probably are a bit much as well?  You kids these days!

          I try to reference The Killing of a Chinese Bookie once a day...and let us not forget Susan Blakely's gyno shot in Capone, beating Sharon Stone to the punch by 17 years.

Sardondi

Quote from: Eddie Coyle on November 02, 2012, 11:54:46 AM
          So you think my references to Cleo Noel and Adolph Dubs probably are a bit much as well?  You kids these days!

          I try to reference The Killing of a Chinese Bookie once a day...and let us not forget Susan Blakely's gyno shot in Capone, beating Sharon Stone to the punch by 17 years.

Or James L. Dozier or William Francis Buckley. Hell, Johnny Spann won't get a response from many under 30. You're scaring me.

I knew nothing about Susan Blakeley airing it out. I always thought she seemed a little Pollyanna-ish. But I preferred the older-woman gig worked by Angie Dickinson in Big Bad Momma.

Eddie Coyle

Quote from: Sardondi on November 02, 2012, 01:53:39 PM
Or James L. Dozier or William Francis Buckley. Hell, Johnny Spann won't get a response from many under 30. You're scaring me.

I'll scare you a little more. On the morning of Jan 28, 1982(a thursday) I was in first grade and stayed home from school, because my insomniac mania had me up all night watching the coverage of Dozier's rescue. The weirdest six year old on Earth.

          Buckley's case probably was the linchpin for Iran-Contra, having a station chief nabbed and left to die chained to a radiator was a devastating blow. And the week after he died, the TWA 847 crisis began. It was something every other week back then.

Sardondi

Quote from: Eddie Coyle on November 02, 2012, 02:21:20 PM
       ....Buckley's case probably was the linchpin for Iran-Contra, having a station chief nabbed and left to die chained to a radiator was a devastating blow. And the week after he died, the TWA 847 crisis began. It was something every other week back then.

Which I try to remind folks when I hear the usual moaning about "O woe is us! Horrible times, horrible times!" And the BS about a "divided America" - bullshit. Try the 60's on for size for a divided time. Hundreds of thousands marching in the streets, firebombings, a could couple of dozen actual riots in major US cities, scores dead. A dreadful decade for America. Which of course was dwarfed by 1850's-1900 which period was more or less a bell curve of regional acrimony showing what a truly divided America was. And "today's bitter elections"? Oh come on! Does no one read any more? Look at the election of 1800 and then talk to me about partisan bitterness. The guys back then played for blood. We're pussies.

And yes, you scare me.

Pragmier

Teacher to 6 year old: "Eddie, what is that you're drawing?"

Eddie: "The Nucleo Operativo Centrale di Sicurezza are rescuing General Dozier from the Red Brigades, they're the bad guys and a Marxist-Leninist organization. I like to draw sometimes, you know, because of my insomnia mania."

Teacher: "Umm"

Eddie Coyle

Quote from: Pragmier on November 03, 2012, 05:31:57 AM
Teacher to 6 year old: "Eddie, what is that you're drawing?"

Eddie: "The Nucleo Operativo Centrale di Sicurezza are rescuing General Dozier from the Red Brigades, they're the bad guys and a Marxist-Leninist organization. I like to draw sometimes, you know, because of my insomnia mania."

Teacher: "Umm"
You have no idea how close you are...but I lacked any artistic skill, so I'd been more likely writing a comparative analysis of similar actions by the IRA,ETA and Red Army Faction.While the teachers thought of ways to segregate me before I ruined the other kids. 

Eddie Coyle

Quote from: Sardondi on November 03, 2012, 02:48:05 AM
Which I try to remind folks when I hear the usual moaning about "O woe is us! Horrible times, horrible times!" And the BS about a "divided America" - bullshit. Try the 60's on for size for a divided time. Hundreds of thousands marching in the streets, firebombings, a could couple of dozen actual riots in major US cities, scores dead. A dreadful decade for America. Which of course was dwarfed by 1850's-1900 which period was more or less a bell curve of regional acrimony showing what a truly divided America was. And "today's bitter elections"? Oh come on! Does no one read any more? Look at the election of 1800 and then talk to me about partisan bitterness. The guys back then played for blood. We're pussies.

And yes, you scare me.

          If you saw me in person those fears would be allayed...actually, not really.

        In the course of a calendar year(12/80-10/81) we saw Lennon, Reagan, Pope John Paul II and Sadat shot. Imagine the neurosis that would accompany such acts if they occurred now. And don't even get me started on 1968...
           The 1896 elections had real fears of cities like Cleveland turning into a Paris Commune, 1871 type of situation. Not long after, anarchists were hitting Wall Street in a way that Al Qaeda dreams of. Imagine if MoveOn.com was around for the 1876 election.

          The LA Riots of '92 were memorably destructive...largely because something like that hadn't occurred since Miami a decade prior...and that was memorable because those riots were first significant race riots since 1964-68 where they were de rigueur.

          Skyjackings anyone? Literally dozens a month between 1968-1972. They don't happen anymore.

       

Sardondi

Yep, the 1876 election, as well as the 1888 Benjamin Harrison- Grover Cleveland race, were corrupt. To think that in 1876 the President was literally hand selected, and in an atmosphere of the incredibly painful Reconstruction (people from outside of the South generally have no knowledge, or interest, in how terrible conditions were for virtually everyone in the South for more than 10 years after the war.) That was a powder keg.

The 1960 election was almost certainly stolen for JFK by Chicago Mayor Richard Daley. Nixon was never given the credit he deserved for so magnanimously foregoing what very likely could have been a successful election challenge in Illinois, on the grounds that it would hurt the country.



Eddie Coyle

Quote from: Sardondi on November 03, 2012, 02:40:03 PM


The 1960 election was almost certainly stolen for JFK by Chicago Mayor Richard Daley. Nixon was never given the credit he deserved for so magnanimously foregoing what very likely could have been a successful election challenge in Illinois, on the grounds that it would hurt the country.
Let us not forget Momo Giancana's role. I had a pretty fun ongoing dialogue with a professor who probably still has a McGovern bumper sticker on his VW camper. I basically said Nixon needed CREEP, because  '72 wasn't the safe bet that the final tally showed...and that 1960 justified Nixon's paranoia. My professor refused to acknowledge any Kennedy mishegas in against Nixon  '60...but admitted the RFK did McCarthy dirty in '68! It was funny watching the sophistry....The Kennedys would screw other Dems, but not Nixon.

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod