BENGHAZI DOT ONE, WHY THE VIDEO AND WHY AP

Birdies | May 15, 2013 | Mesta

[MestaMachine]

Here we go. Have at it.

[MestaMachine]

Anyone wanting on or off this ping list, please advise.

[penelopesire]

Bookmark! Looks like some interesting dots!! Will read and comment later after digesting it all.

[MHGinTN]

How do we know the Nokoulas character is an FBI asset?... ‘Cause if he is, this is one huge false flag which has treasonous international overtones. In effect, this would be little barry bastard boy trying to overthrow the head of a foreign FRIENDLY government! I would put NOTHING past these treacherous democrips, but proof of the FBI asset assertion is key to this.

[MHGinTN]

BTW, I made a quick copy, for the record, since this is so hot it might get zotted.

[hecticskeptic]

Well… some context is obviously needed for Obama’s UN speech. The quote referenced is about ¾ of the way down the text of the speech in a long shopping list of ‘who the future must not belong to’…

The future must not belong to those corrupt few who steal a country’s resources -- it must be won by the students and entrepreneurs, the workers and business owners who seek a broader prosperity for all people. Those are the women and men that America stands with; theirs is the vision we will support.

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied.

I’m not saying I agree or disagree with the comment that this is an ‘evil speech’…. but context means everything when people speak.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

Awesome work.

[Southack]

Holder went after the leaker to the AP in May of 2012.

Benghazi and the video excuse were 9/11/2012.

You were just 5 months off. Not bad for a typical conspiracy theory!

[Sleeping Freeper]

Any one else miss the “the United States Government had absolutely nothing to do with this video” repeats from HRC, Obama, Rice and Carney in the following.... I didn't see that talking point in the emails released yesterday!! The video was a false flag to cover for what was either going on what might go wrong...... My guess is that the U.S. Government WAS behind the video....

The orchestrated cover-up (just a small snippet):

1.
Hillary Clinton Speaking at a press conference from the State Department on September 13, 2012
“Let me state very clearly — and I hope it is obvious — that the United States Government had absolutely nothing to do with this video.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXYdb57P7T4

2.
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney — Golden, CO, 9/13/12
“As Secretary Clinton said today, the United States government had nothing to do with this movie.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/13/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carney-golden-co-91312

3.
Hillary Clinton Speaks at Ceremony as Bodies of Americans Killed in Libya Arrive in the US September 14, 2012
“We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with.”
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/09/14/transcript-video-hillary-clinton-speaks-at-ceremony-as-bodies-of-americans-killed-in-libya-arrive-in-the-us/

4.
White House spokesman Jay Carney held a press briefing September 14, 2012
“The reason why there’s unrest is because of the film. This is in response to the film… this is not a film that the United States government had anything to do with. We reject its message and its contents we find it both reprehensible.”
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/09/14/carney-anti-islam-video-completely-to-blame-for-unrest/

5.
U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice, goes on morning shows at NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX and CNN. September 16, 2012
Rice called the attack a “direct result of a heinous and offensive video that was widely disseminated, that the U.S. government had nothing to do with.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501713_162-57541739/timeline-of-comments-on-attack-on-us-consulate/

6.
Sept. 18: Obama was asked about the Benghazi attack on “The Late Show with David Letterman.”
“As offensive as this video was and, obviously, we’ve denounced it and the United States government had nothing to do with it.
http://factcheck.org/2012/10/benghazi-timeline/

7.
President Barack Obama’s speech to the UN General Assembly — full text September 25, 2012
“That is what we saw play out the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video”
http://www.timesofisrael.com/president-barack-obamas-speech-to-the-un-general-assembly-full-text/

[GeorgeWashingtonsGhost]

I'm going to have to read this twice to capture all of its nuances. You spent some serious time on this.

Is it possible that Nakoula is being silenced by being kept in jail on bogus parole violation charges because it was the CIA or another agency that took his video and OVER DUBBED IT WITH ANTI-MOHAMMED LANGUAGE so they could then blame the YouTube video for Benghazi?

Is Nakoula a CIA operative? Is he just an innocent casualty in a gov't cover-up?

I'll read again.. Intense stuff.

[PieterCasparzen]

The very first story out of the box is that the vid maker was an 'anonymous' Israeli Jewish billionaire.

To start out analyzing this hypothetical, this first statement is that such was the story that was going to be the administration's PR after the event.

This would then need corroborating written or oral evidence to be absolutely certain that this was the plan.

Of course, us not-inside-the-administration folks can't usually get inside info like that (?@#$@#$), but anyhoo we then try to deduce what's going on with some analysis of other facts. In cases like this, that's something like analyzing just how realistic it would be, how helpful, i.e., just what would different cross sections of America poll like in such a scenario.

I can't help but think that the mainstream press does not often paint Jewish billionaires as terrorists; I can't remember an instance of it. Certainly there are all sorts of conspiracy theories painting practically everyone as terrorists at one time or another, but in terms of US mainstream media, I don't see Jewish, or, for that matter any other billionaires receiving such treatment in the media.

Come to think of it, the dark sides of even the infamous Marc Rich were, as far as I can recall, completely skimmed over by the big networks. And the dude received a Presidential pardon from the Klintoon.

[GeorgeWashingtonsGhost]

P.S. I recall one of the actresses in this video said there was never any anti-Mohammed language in the movie script.

[Amntn]

Please add me to the ping list. Thanks!

[Paine in the Neck]

‘ll need to digest this more but I think you’re pretty much on target here.

The questions going through my head now are:

Has anyone laid eyes on Nakoula since he got locked up?

Has he been deposed?

Has he been ‘disappeared’?

Another thing still wandering loose in my head is the issue of whether Brennan was running his own op on behalf of the Troika - Obama, Axelrod, Jarrett - that Petreus didn’t have on his radar screen. I can believe Petreus was in on the arms deals but the hostage scheme would have been Brennan. I base this only on my feel for the characters of the two men.

[GeorgeWashingtonsGhost]

Great summary. These talking points are so scripted! I think it's possible someone in the gubmint took Nakoula's video and overdubbed it with anti-Mohammed remarks for use in their narrative.

Cover-up for a staged hostage-taking of Stevens, gone bad when the SEALs disobeyed orders to stand down.

[panzerkamphwageneinz]

There’s a huge hole in this theory. And that is that Obama would look good after a slaughter of our people in Benghazi and that the trading of the blind sheik would rectify that.

He would have lost the election if such a slaughter had occurred. Romney would have eaten him alive and the American people would have seen the truth.

Conspiracies just aren’t containable in regards to secrecy. I don’t doubt the gun running, and Stevens was a necessary casualty of keeping it secret. That explains the Turkish Embassador, and the Turkish Prime Minister being in DC now.

CONTAINMENT

[PieterCasparzen]

IMHO, it seems likely that elements of the US government were involved in video from its inception and through its use as PR / propaganda.

It’s just too plainly idiotic, the whole video scenario.

And if you really search contemporaneous news sources, I’m sure you’ll find the video being reported just too stinkin’ early on to not have been put out there by the government.

The government has an “ongoing investigation” into what happened for weeks, but the day of the attack and the demonstrations elsewhere, almost instantaneously the video was a topic of news reporting ? It stinks.

[Jack of all Trades]

mark

[MHGinTN]

Context is important when HONEST people speak. But when you know someone lies to you repeatedly, then you do not give them the benefit of the doubt just because they may have included flowering sounding phrases amongst the lies. Little barry absatrd boy was spewing lies and false claims in that UN speech. Among those lies and decpetions he sprinkled a few flowery sounding phrases, probably meant to do just what it appears they have done, fool some into believing he is sincere and trying to bring equitable peace. He is in reality pushing the Caliphate.

[MHGinTN]

Bent willie was not trying to assist the establishment of a Moose Slime Caliphate, whereas this devil in the White Hut IS under instructions to do just that!