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.
What pictures....and who were they sent to??
This sounds plausable, more so than whatever else is circulating. Except for a few glitches. I don’t understand how a known exchange, a proof of dealing with terrorists, would come close to guaranteeing his re-election. Reagan’s deal wasn’t described as Arms for Hostages until well after he became president. Who would believe that Obammy struck fear into the hearts of the enemy? Secondly, the timing is far too obvious, especially now that most of the facts are known by those who really wanted to know the fact. Third, what are the chances that Stevens was brought into this “surprise” and acquiesced? How reliable would his actions have been if he had NOT been brought into the picture? And who in this administration would have dared expose him (and his preferences) to the homophobes in Libya and thus to the American media? Lastly, the two Navy Seals could have been “handled” and apparently were.
As to a different surprise? Too late and too obvious.
While others choose to ignore facts right in front of their faces.
The simple solution is that there is a war and the incident was a well planned and successful enemy assault that killed a high level target.
What makes you think terrorists would think a single ambassador was a desirable target? No matter how 'popular' he was with some of the people there, he would just be replaced.
You're underestimating the enemy if you think they would make such a maximum effort for a minimal result.
Had they continued to occupy the embassy...maybe. Had they held the bodies and submitted a list of demands for their return....perhaps.
But just to kill less than a handful of Americans and parade the dead ambassador bare-assed through the streets?
Sorry. I'm not buying it.
A penny for your thoughts.
Good question, Ann
For those who do not know who Eric Nordstrom is, here is a brief quote from the Washington Times:
“Eric Nordstrom, who was the top security official in Libya earlier this year, testified he was criticized for seeking more security. He said conversations he had with people in Washington led him to believe that it was “abundantly clear we were not going to get resources until the aftermath of an incident. How thin does the ice have to get before someone falls through?””
“He said his exasperation reached a point where he told a colleague that “for me the Taliban is on the inside of the building.””
Read more: FACT CHECK: Slips on Libya, Syria, auto bailout in vice presidential debate - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/11/fact-check-slips-libya-syria-auto-bailout-vice-pre/#ixzz29II2crfR
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/09/21/boldly-into-the-breach/
Kozy,
Thanks for that link. Those two SEALs are TRUE HEROS.
Had you been paying attention you would know the testimony in front of the Congress was something to the effect that All the others were gone, we were the last flag flying and they were coming after us.
The scenario proposed is merely the most recent of many many FReeper conspiracies that are argued infinitum but have no basis in fact.
“It’s 9/11 anniversary in Libya. Why on that day, or on ANY day, would we not have Marines guarding our embassy?”
Exactly! Instead, we had “security” from “The February 17th Martyrs’ Brigade”. Libya basically said don’t worry, our guys can protect your embassy...WTF? This administration is a TREASONOUS disgrace!!!
All the above.
The missing manpads are the key. Follow them. There is the story.
We’re going to pay to get those manpads back. Oh, how we’re going to pay. Obama and Hillary lost those weapons. Be sure to thank your friends and neighbors who vote Democrat.
Those Americans were killed to protect the manpads and drive up the extortion money we’ll have to pay to get them back. And they’ll use that extortion money to fight against us. Obama and Hillary lost them.
mark
This theory, if correct, makes my blood run cold. It runs cold because with this administration in charge, it is SO possible the theory is correct.
In any event, I get emotional when I think of what our heroes went through in their last hours of life in that embassy before they were mowed down fighting to their last breaths. What horrible, unnecessary deaths!
I say close down all our embassy compounds in each and every third-world, dangerous enemy hell hole,
Why should we taxpayers be paying through the nose to support the local economies of terrorists and savages who are just biding their time to storm an American diplomatic compound and murder everyone in it?
Leni
After the election, he will have more flexibility.
Interesting.
But just to kill less than a handful of Americans and parade the dead ambassador bare-assed through the streets?
Sorry. I’m not buying it.
Their real mission was to free The Blind Sheik and their ally was/is Vallerie Jarrett.
They got him to hospital (their story on hospital) but he was dead.
So, "shit, shit, shit". The plan unraveled with Stevens death.
By the way, the video was posted in July? Who knew enough about this video to parade it about at this particular time for what looks like a particular situation - the video narrative starting "riots"?
Bump
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.