Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Two SEALs ruin October Surprise
Author ^ | 10/14/2012 | Kozy

Posted on 10/14/2012 8:28:48 AM PDT by Kozy

The murder of Ambassador Stevens at Benghazi is Obama's October surprise gone bad thanks to two former SEALS who were not supposed to be at Benghazi. But then I ran to the end of the story so let's back fill the datapoints.

First President Morsi first public statement to us was that he wanted the blind iman who first bombed the WTC released. Now Obama forever dedicated to appeasing the muslim world, bowing to them comes natural to him, knew that he had to obey Morsi's request however he couldn't release Omar Abdul-Rahman. There had to be a reason powerful enough to warrant his release. What better than to return to the Carter era of American hostages?

Obama sees a way to release the iman and secure his reelection in one act. So the wheels are set in motion. So he needed a cover story. Oh, the You Tube video that no one has seen, released in July. America could be shamed into releasing the iman because someone posted an obscure video and we have to follow Obama's lead and bow to muslims.

Next weaken the security at Benghazi by removing the security teams and employing Libyan bodyguards for the ambassador. In effect the embassy could not defend itself. The back channel had to be from the WH to the iman's legal representatives. It was suggested that Obama needed a reason to release the iman that America could agree to. What better than hostages? They were informed that there were no security forces at Benghazi to defend Stevens so over run the embassy and take him hostage. Really easy.

What was not planned for were former SEALS Donerty and Woods. They were not part of Stevens security detail; they happened to be in Benghazi working for the CIA to located missing surface-to-air missiles.

So the terrorists plan the assault on the embassy thinking there would be no resistance. Well two SEALS never back down from defending America and Americans. These two heros gave their lives fighting to protect our embassy and our ambassador. No telling how many peaceful muslim they transported to the after life however the terrorists who thought this was just a walk in the park protect now sought out the Americans to kill them not hold them captive. The over throw went from hostage taking to killing.

Now the WH knew the plan had blown up. There were no hostages only dead Americans. How to cover? Roll out the 14 minute video, no one has seen, as the cause. The WH cover up was in play.

With the killing of Ambassador Stevens, there could be no exchange, no October surprise. Oh what was the October surprise? Well Obama would spend a month negotiating with the terrorists for the release of Ambassador Stevens and finally and after his focused efforts on saving Stevens' live, Stevens would be released just before the election. Obama would have sucked out all the energy from the campaign as everyone would be watching him, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, negotiate for the release of Stevens. The world would applaud him, the muslim would have their murderous iman back, he would be reelected and the destruction of America who go on.

We can only thank every day these SEALS for defending America with their lives.

A lot of datapoints, Benghazi, President Morsi, SEALS, blind iman, 14 minute You Tube video; withdrawal of security from embassy, October surprise and Obama's October surprise.

Wonder which story makes more sense? Mine of the one the WH spins every day that keeps changing as the lies are exposed.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: alteredsource; benghazi; benghazigate; benghazimotive; benghaziplot; navyseals; octobersurprise; seals; threatmatrix; vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-116 last
Comment #101 Removed by Moderator

Comment #102 Removed by Moderator

To: Kozy

Really - that’s your best shot? In addressing someone who’s been at this site almost as long as you have, your comeback is as lame as your theory. Or am I just part of the conspiracy too?


103 posted on 10/14/2012 12:22:21 PM PDT by GreatOne (You will bow down before me, Son of Jor-el!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Kozy

I have a question, Does anyone remember hearing that the blind imman had a court date scheduled 9/11/2001 at about 9:00am, at a courhouse close to the WTC? I remember hearing this on Fox News the week before the terrorist attacks. I still don’t understand why our government wasn’t more on top of the whole thing, considering he was on trial for planning the basement bombing of the towers. I don’t blame Bush I blame Clinton.


104 posted on 10/14/2012 12:28:10 PM PDT by This I Wonder32460
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kozy
Let's try this again (edited to make mods happy, I hope):

There is absolutely no way on God's green earth that Obama is going to release the first World Trade Center bomber (which no other than Kozy has even mentioned) under any circumstances prior to an election. None, zip, nada. As already stated, if Obama wanted to release him, it'd be done after the election, not before it.

Additionally, how does having a kidnapped ambassador in any way, shape, or form end up with Obama being viewed as a hero or strong on foreign policy. It'd be the exact same scenario as 1979 - president in election year facing a hostage crisis with Islamic terrorists. Even if the hostage were rescued, the fact that he didn't have enough security, gave numerous warnings in advance of his concerns, etc. would still exist. In actuality, it makes the situation worse for Obama because the media would forced to give the story - and Obama's miserable failings - the attention it deserves.

Obama's people jumped on the YouTube video excuse solely as a cover for their own mistakes. They did not plan to set up one of our Ambassadors for kidnapping or engage in any other nefarious activity.

105 posted on 10/14/2012 12:41:24 PM PDT by GreatOne (You will bow down before me, Son of Jor-el!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GreatOne
It was in a speech by Morsi in June:

http://panafricannews.blogspot.com/2012/06/president-morsi-says-he-will-work-for.html

requesting his release for humanitarian grounds.

That was the signal to Obama to bow to the muslim brotherhood.

106 posted on 10/14/2012 12:46:26 PM PDT by Kozy (Calling Al Gore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Kozy
Please listen to Colonel Hunt at this url...

http://audio.wrko.com/device/mobile/a/64657882/col-hunt-on-the-newest-libyan-revelations.htm

His point: everybody in the chain of command knew about the attack in Benghazi as it was going on for SIX HOURS but were too afraid to scramble some kind of military rescue help. The brave, led by the unworthy cowards.

107 posted on 10/14/2012 12:59:20 PM PDT by JustTheTruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kozy

Amazing analysis ping. It fits.


108 posted on 10/14/2012 2:44:38 PM PDT by islander-11 (Save Nantucket - Vote Republican!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kozy
"There had to be a reason powerful enough to warrant his [Omar Abdul-Rahman's] release. What better than to return to the Carter era of American hostages?

Obama sees a way to release the iman and secure his reelection in one act. So the wheels are set in motion. So he needed a cover story. Oh, the You Tube video that no one has seen, released in July. America could be shamed into releasing the iman because someone posted an obscure video and we have to follow Obama's lead and bow to muslims."

I'm sorry, but sad sack (of sh!t) Obama isn't capable of concocting such plan even this ridiculous, all on his own. He's an incompetent false front mouthpiece for those who are really in charge.

I'd be looking at Valerie Jarrett, David Axelrod, and others high up in his (mal)administration as the source conspirators in this. And no, Hillary isn't bright enough to have planned such a caper either.

109 posted on 10/14/2012 3:18:04 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Popman
Your theory though plausible.... Has a hole in it...
The Obama administration could have just easily waited until after the election to “ release” the blind sheik
If he won.... It's done for humantian reasons....
If he lost...it’s done just because he can....

You're forgetting one small, (but critical) detail, which is the essential quid pro quo in this deal.

The Libyan terrorists would not have released the 'hostages', then trusted Obama to hold up his end of the bargain after he was re-elected. No, they would have demanded that the US hand over the blind sheik now, as exchange for playing the hostage charade with them.

No sheik - no deal.

Let's also not forget that as a radical Muslim sympathizer and serial appeaser, Obama would have wanted to release the blind sheik on whatever pretense he could get away with, as a matter of fundamental principle.

As it is, the whole deal went south anyway, due to the presence of two American heroes.

110 posted on 10/14/2012 3:44:47 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Kozy

You are inspired. Will spread your interpretation.


111 posted on 10/14/2012 11:59:15 PM PDT by lulu16 (May the Good Lord take a liking to you!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GreatOne

**Obama’s people jumped on the YouTube video excuse solely as a cover for their own mistakes. They did not plan to set up one of our Ambassadors for kidnapping or engage in any other nefarious activity. **

If I’m not mistaken, Hillary issued her correction apology/announcement on the State Dept website (that was later deleted?) BEFORE the Benghazi attack. In that statement, she was already referring to an offensive video (the YouTube video).


112 posted on 10/15/2012 9:08:57 AM PDT by Nita Nupress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

Bump for later reference


113 posted on 10/15/2012 5:29:41 PM PDT by Ghengis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: tsowellfan

“I’ve often wondered right from the beginning if before the convention Obama promised Morsi that the US would not recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Out of political pressure Obama was forced (and reluctantly so) so change it back during the convention.”

I’ve been saying the same thing since very early on.


114 posted on 10/17/2012 7:40:40 PM PDT by treetopsandroofs (Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

bttt


115 posted on 10/17/2012 8:04:55 PM PDT by ConservativeMan55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: musicman

BFLR


116 posted on 10/18/2012 1:01:26 PM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-116 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson