I'm sticking with pushing my own memes... if it puts an image in one empty head somewhere on the interwebz then it's a good thing.
Posted on 10/15/2012 2:40:22 PM PDT by mgist
I received a phone call from an old friend that has been in Washington D.C. for years and is fairly well-connected politically. What she told me was ugly and sinister, yet very compelling. She said she had received information from someone high up in White House circles, and wanted my thoughts. No, there is no leaked email, no concrete proof, and this article is based on “hearsay.” I’m not one that usually engages in or repeats hearsay, but if this is true, it could be the biggest story in 50 years. According to her, Barack Obama, wanting an “October Surprise,” had secretly arranged with the Muslim Brotherhood for a kidnapping of our ambassador. Then sometime in October before the election Obama was to orchestrate some great military action to rescue Ambassador Stevens, causing all of America to cheer Obama’s strong foreign policy and bravery and making him look like a hero. After all, his supposed killing of Osama Bin Laden bounce had long since faded. Thus, sweeping him to victory in November. Imagine the headlines and talking points. The election would be a lock. The Muslim Brotherhood has every reason to want Obama re-elected in November and have an American President sympathetic to their causes. Not to mention an administration filled with Muslim appeasers. Therefore, they agreed to aid in these theatrics. Unfortunately for Ambassador Stevens and three others, the Brotherhood could not control the hired thugs that were to perform the kidnapping and things escalated and four American lives were lost. Panic set in at the White House and with little time to place blame as far away from Obama as they could, they settled on a ridiculous fairy tale about an irrelevant video posted four months prior on YouTube and ran with it. Barack Obama even ran with it after evidence showed he knew better and ran with it all the way to his speech at the U.N.
So now, they are admitting it was a terrorist attack. They are admitting that the State Department had denied requests for more security from Washington, but nobody told them. Blame anyone but Barack Obama. I’m betting the White House is smirking and perfectly happy to be accused of having a breakdown in communication as opposed to the alternative. This scenario, if true, more than satisfies my common sense gland. Photo Credit: osipovva
Remember that the CIA who was supposed to get control of the SAMS, chemical weapons and nuclear material during the fall of Gadafi failed to find them...and guess what... one of the SAM’s was used to down the Chinook helicopter in Afghanistan that killed 38 of our best troops...
paging null and void for a conspiracy ping....
Stupid theory of the week winner.
I'm sticking with pushing my own memes... if it puts an image in one empty head somewhere on the interwebz then it's a good thing.
“An over the top, wild accustion, IMO.”
And an example of why conservatism often “underperforms.”
Because it is full of kooks who waste time on fringy but juicy discussion topics, instead of the obvious.
Why not just stick with: Obama let Americans down, by not paying proper attention to the safety of Americans abroad?
Strange is it not.......in 2008 the mantra was "ABH" - anybody but hillary.
This guy never got the scrutiny he deserved. We are all paying for it now.
I speculated this about a month ago. It was strange how Obama skipped intel meetings and then afterwards instisted it was the film that was to blame...etc
I'm 53 and the same applies. I tolerated Clinton.
There is a very simple theory that makes sense.
Obama was informed during the 6 hour attack.
Why promote the theory it was a protest? Because, otherwise it was a coordinated attack on a sovereign consulate, an act of war, on 9-11.
“We’re under attack, it’s an act of war. Would you consdier this response? Shall we stage men and material? What would you like to do Mr. President...?!?!”
Obama wanted to eat taco’s and go to bed early...so they labeled is a protest that got out of hand, said they needed more information. Obama slept well knowing the headlines around the would NOT be “Terrorist Attack on 9-11-12”.
The liberal media lapped up the cover story at the dog bowl for upwards of two weeks, the cover story worked, it squashed the truth for “long enough”.
Consider this assessment as it relates to the attack and communications:
Col. Hunt On The Newest Libyan Revelations
http://audio.wrko.com/a/64657882/col-hunt-on-the-newest-libyan-revelations.htm
Something about this smelled far more rotten to me from the start than the simple cover up. The video clip was too obscure and never in any of the intel briefs. I think this person is on to something. I think the story they told right away and kept pitching was preplanned before the attack. I also think that there was supposed to be protesters before the attack, but the bad guys changed the plan. Also, I read that after the bad guys had their way with the Ambassador, they took him to a hospital to keep him alive. Very out of character for them.
>> This would actually explain a lot
Blaming the film for the uprisings was an effort to bolster the International cause of outlawing negative speech against Islam.
Normally, when dealing with normal human beings, I’d agree with you.
However....consider the group we’re talking about here. They would have a LOT to lose, the circle of those “in the know” could be quite small.
Self preservation is a powerful motivator. No, I fall into the camp of “not only plausible, but highly probable”.
So go over the top and wildly accuse, let them get a taste if their own medicine, make them prove thus us not true! I’m tired if the one way street, and if going up it the wrong way seems risky, remember what going with the wimpy republican flow has achieved. They did it... Prove me wrong!
Agreed. Lame Cherry blog has some interesting insight into this theory if you can make it through the writing style. It’s kinda like Dennis Miller but less funny.
Sorry, I just don’t believe that the number of people involved in an action like this could keep their mouths shut. If this story were to be true, the plan went bad, so there would be more incentive for someone to open their mouths and throw someone else under the bus...
The vast number of people involved in hiding/obscuring/covering up/lying/outright criminal activity regarding 0bastard’s past and real life belies your opinion.
Not that evil?
And you read articles on FR and think that he’s merely stupid?
There is something very wrong about this whole sordid affair. The Cairo Embassy issued an apology for the video ahead of any protests or attacks, almost as though on cue. Where did they get the info that this video even existed?
Then the ambassador was sodomized, but we’re not hearing anything about that——why not? Why not let We, the People, know exactly what the barbarians did? This needs to be challenged. I want Obama, point blank, to have to answer the question, “was our ambassador, either dead or alive, sexually assaulted”?
Then after all this, we put together an ad in Pakistan costing $70,000 again proclaiming our deepest regrets that an American citizen had insulted the prophet, and this had the desired effect of ginning up a few after-the-fact protests there.
Very odd things occurred here. We must demand a thorough investigation.
Of course it is still just a theory. A very interesting theory. It would explain so many inconsistencies with this story. It also explains why both Obama and Hillary have been a mess lately. Obama looked very guilty at the debate. He’s had a lot of things to be guilty about, and managed to keep his cynical straight face. This could have been the whopper that they know will someday be known.
Romney should mention the Benghazi coverup on every question asked in tomorrow night’s debate. Obama will come unglued.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.