Skip to comments.What is true and what is not true about Benghazi?
Posted on 12/03/2012 7:23:36 AM PST by jmaroneps37
A hard to read, hard to believe, hard to write about communique from South Florida Tea Party sources involves the alleged real reasons General David Petreaus was forced out a few days before the Benghazi hearings.
Citing the stand down orders, the stupid video, and the pulled security, this memo makes a convincing case that a failed October Surprise kidnap event of the U.S. diplomat had a political backdrop involving the impending election.
Various background data mentioned in this bulletin contain a tit for tat exchange of Mission Chief Chris Stevens for the Blind Sheik, Omar Abdel Rahman who was involved in the 1993 U.S. World Trade Center attack.
Also Alluded to is trade is a possible $1.2 billion in U.S. aid earmarked for the Muslim Brotherhood, the group expected to have had a primary role in the Stevens-Sheik switch. Now, Americas stellar fighting mans takedown because of titillating sex, lies, and Email trails just seems too convenient, too time driven, too slick by half. Election Day loomed, the Benghazi hearings can be delayed no longer, and tight poll numbers needed a deus ex machina.
Was a contrived solution to this triangulated difficulty imposed by Democrat operatives hell bent on putting Obama back in the Oval Office? The best laid plans of mice and men often do go far astray, and the stand down order to a tiny group of highly trained ex-Navy Seals/CIA operatives backfired when they managed to employ the full measure of their skills, and took out over 80 attackers in the process...
which enraged the attackers, who were led to believe that they would encounter no resistance. Was Ambassador Stevens defiled in horrible ways and dragged through Benghazi streets?
Were two drones really flying over the consulate during this horrific
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
We’ll never get the truth about anything of Obama’s actions,kimd of like his past and records.
The moles dig deep.
Coach, thanks for all you do. One clarification I’d like to bring to your attention. This one fact is critical and every American has been victimized by this one HUGE lie - therefore we are all perpetuating this error. There was NEVER a US Consulate in Benghazi. NEVER. The only consulate that ever existed in Libya was located in Tripoli and not opened until August of 2012.
Not the White House, nor the State Department, the US Government, or the CIA - NOT ONE US GOVT AGENCY ever indicated or documented the existence, the construction, or any ceremony officially opening any US Consulate in Benghazi - therefore the first, initial and immediate lie that was coordinated from the very beginning was the LIE that a US consulate actually existed in Benghazi. It did not. Please don’t repeat the Obama administration’s lie. We are all unintentionally aiding their disinformation campaign when we do so.
So - the fact that no Consulate ever existed in Benghazi leads us to the next logical question - why was Ambassador Stephens in Benghazi? What was he doing there? Why is Obama lying about the very simple, verifiable fact that no Consulate ever existed in Benghazi?
Doug Haggman has done some brilliant research on this fact alone, here: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51470
Thanks again for all you do.
In the mean time, keep praying. Start, if you haven't already, and don't stop if you have. It may be the best tool we have.
Why would Obama run all the risk of kidnapping his own “Ambassador”? To trade for the blind sheikh? Why? I know that church Obama went to in Chicago isn’t much, but no Muslim I’ve known would walk into even a supposed Christian church for 20 years. And they had the Ambassador. You think those “looters” wouldn’t have taken Stevens to the thugs? They had him. Where’s the blind sheikh? They may have kidnapped Stevens, but it wasn’t on Obama’s orders or to trade for the blind sheikh.
Anyone wanting on or off this ping list, please advise.
Please add me to your Benghazi ping list.