Skip to comments.Benghazi Leads to Iran, Not Al Qaeda
Posted on 08/03/2013 1:24:47 PM PDT by smoothsailing
August 3, 2013
Why is Obama doing everything in the world to cover-up the truth in Benghazi? Why is Obama administering lie detector exams every few days to all the CIA operatives who were in Benghazi?
Is it to cover-up the fact that Obama was running guns to the Syrian rebels? Why do that? Both the then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and then-CIA Director Petraeus were openly advocating arming the Syrian rebels.
Is it such a big deal that the United States was secretly arming enemies of Iran's puppet Assad through our NATO-ally, Turkey? No it isn't.
Is the fact that some of the US weapons may have accidentally fallen into al Qaeda's hands that terrible? No. Not at all.
The reason Obama doesn't want the truth of the Benghazi-to-Syrian Rebels gun-running operation to come out is that all of a sudden the "al Qaeda attacked Benghazi" narrative doesn't make any sense. For, why on earth would al Qaeda attack a gun-running operation to the Syria rebels when the Syria rebels themselves are al Qaeda? Al Qaeda wouldn't be attacking their own al Qaeda weapons pipeline.
So, Obama's real fear is not that he ran guns to al Qaeda, but that if this were known, al Qaeda would be removed as the possible suspect in the murder of Ambassador Stevens and three Americans.
That is the real problem, because if al Qaeda is removed as a possible suspect because it was benefitting from the gun-running, who's left as a suspect? Who would want an American weapons pipeline to the Syrian rebels shut down? Once al Qaeda is removed from contention, and that question is posed, there is only one answer: the Huzbullah/Iranian axis....
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
No, it leads to the Muslim Brotherhood...
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
What a dilemma.. Hillary backs Morsi and Morsi attacks the Embassy to get Stevens as hostage to get the Blind Sheik released.
Kind of difficult for 0bama/Hillary to announce that the people who did it are the ones they back, and the ones the U.S. taxpayers were funding in Egypt. Now 0bama is paying ANYONE in Egypt with knowledge to keep their mouths shut. 0bama is BIG on hush money. Lots of lies to keep secret.
Plausible. But, certainly something big is being covered up.
Why? What was in it for them?
If that is really happening then why would any of those people think there life will go on much longer?
The article address that possibility albeit indirectly. I make this connection: The Muslim Brotherhood supports al Qaeda and to a lesser extent the other Syrian rebels, the current beneficiaries of the arms that move from Libya to Turkey to Syria.
Why on earth would the Muslim Brotherhood want to interfere with that flow?
The answer is they wouldn't. The article speculates that it is the Iranians who would want to put the crunch on such an operation. Not a bad theory.
I speculated in an earlier thread that the Libya to Turkey to Syria operation might somehow be bypassing the al-Qaeda rebels. Although that seems unlikely it is a possible motive that would give some credence to your Muslim Brotherhood theory. Particularly if al-Qaeda has independent means to secure Libyan weapons and view the CIA operation as a competitor.
Anyone wanting on or off this ping list, please advise.
IMHO...It was a hit!..Stevens had to go...he knew too much and was balking!
I can’t believe this could happen. Didn’t Obama push the Reset button? Wasn’t that supposed to repair our relations with Iran, Russia, all Islamic nations?
We can add you to the list:
1. Scheme to make a trade for the Blind Sheik that went bad.
2. Iranian operation to stop the flow of arms to the Syrian rebels.
3. Egyptian/MB operation to stop the flow of arms to the Syrian rebels because al Qaeda was being cut out.
4. Obama needed to hit Stevens. The MB stepped in and did the job for him.
I'm sure I missed a couple at least.
Morsi needed a high-profile American hostage that he knew 0bama would trade the Blind Sheik for because 0bama would NEVER allow an Ambassador being held hostage looming over his head right before the election.. No way, no how. Hillary might have opened the door for Morsi by reducing/refusing security for Stevens.. Perhaps she didn’t want 0bama to get re-elected, either. She’s running in 2016 and he’d be a hard act for the Democrats to want to follow (if there’s a country left by then).
Russia has deep interests in Syria and Assad.
I just can't buy into that. Yes Morsi is crazy enough to do it but this couldn't have been a planned deal with Obama. No chance.
The odd thing in all of this is that it seems clear that Obama just washed his hands of it so quickly. He was AWOL that night. Yes he was off to service his highest priority the following day (fundraising, of course) but I'm still waiting for an explanation of what he was doing on the night of the Benghazi strike.
Bingo... I’d bet money on the Russians being the ones who coordinated this attack. And, THAT is the reason Obama didn’t respond... he was afraid.
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.