Great piece as usual bray and I think you covered about everything.
Now most of America knows he was lying about the spontaneous crowd starting the attack as Hilary was claiming and the tapes show it was a well choreographed military operation against his Arab Spring. The only chanting was not about a movie but about his continually bragging about killing Osama as they said there are now millions of Osamas, thanks Obama. Of course there are since he made him into the ultimate martyr while bringing it up as the one reason he should be elected. He couldn’t order at the drive through without telling everyone how he took out Osama and defeated Al Queda, looks like they evened the score with Ambassador Stevens. Mooselimbs rape their male victims before and after death to turn them into women making them one of the 72 virgins which shows what a barbaric cult it is. As the movie claims, the Koran is a perversion of the Old and New Testament Bible. His and Hilary’s foreign policy is now marked with leaving an Ambassador unprotected and having him tortured and raped while he begged for his life before being strangled to death. We are all Ambassador Stevens’ now as he leaves us weakened and more enslaved to their oil.”
As far as the killing of Ambassador Stevens goes,this story seems to never end.
From what I have learned Ambassador Stevens died as a true hero and should be remembered as such.
There is a lot to his story. Stevens name first surfaces in the gay sections of Chicago where he and his companion Austin Tichenor seem to have frequented the same bath houses as Obama and Rahm Emanuelle. How well did they know one another then, is the question.
Later as an Ambassador it appears Stevens who had a deep love for the Libyan people, Islam and rumors were that he was a practicing muslim appears to have been tapped by this White House to help get arms to the freedom fighters trying to get rid of Gadaffi. The question is how successful was he?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-envoy-arrives-in-libya-to-help-opposition-fighters/2011/04/05/AFTIV6lC_story.html
Fast forward to the past few weeks. Seems Stevens’ name had been on a terrorists hit list.Now if your name is on a terror hit list and you were tapped by the white house to get armaments for the Gadaffi hit how much of a stretch is it to think that Stevens was CIA? I suggest not much.
Unfortunately, I don’t have a link for it.
Factor in that Stevens was asked several days before the 911 hit by locals if he wanted additional security at the embassy.
He said no.
Now you turn down security for a suspected hit either because you don’t trust those who would secure you or you are CIA and really don’t need anyone else’s security.
I think its the latter.
Three days later all hell breaks lose. Steven’s is captured some say dead, some say alive.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2934213/posts
Rumors are,and there is some video with these accusations,that he was tortured, raped and then after he was dead taken to the hospital where he was pronounced dead.
My question at this point is who wanted him dead the most?
Was he such a threat to terror types in Libya that a hit was issued? Or, was there more to it?
Was sensitive info given to terrorists that enabled them to take him out with weapons he may have provided to them which is muzzie style, by our side. Say the administration or the CIA? Had he become a liability more to us than to them?
Hard questions. Difficult to answer. But the truth lies somewhere. It will be up to us to find out where.
Something as important as the death of an ambassador to a violent terrorist attack, and the DNC media seemingly oblivious to it because the current administration is denying such an attack—and calling it a demonstration against a film—and then criticizing the film, seems on the surface like a plausible explanation in light of the difficulty of getting a first hand report...
But just hold on now! The attack DID happen, the ambassador and three other Americans ARE dead, reports now show they WERE brutalized, and the DNC media STILL hasn't picked up on this???!!! Something smells really bad in Denmark!
Consider how often the DNC media likes to pat itself on the back about its Fourth Estate role of watchdog and investigator, speaking truth to power and all of that, doesn't this fly in the face of that meme? In other words, why are they HIDING the TRUTH?
And of such a vital thing, a thing that effects this country and every other country trying to keep their own people safe in an ever-growing dangerous world?
They would lie to ensure a President whose policies they advocate would win an election. The truth be damned, that's what they're doing. No, that's what they have DONE!
Besides us, who else even knows, and even gives a damn???
The average Joe American was hoodwinked. Because let me tell you brother, when I bring up what REALLY happened to the Ambassador, people look at me like I'm nuts. They have NO IDEA.
Good information but I’m more simplistic. I think the Muslims killed Stevens because they could and knew it would be a shot at America. Also against 0bama who keeps bragging over how “he” killed 0sama.
The coverup, or rather denial, by Hillary, 0bama’s brotherhood and many in the media was simply a desire to postpone the truth because it hurts the anointed one’s reelection efforts. Now voters know he’s not only failed on domestic issues but his foreign policies are getting us killed abroad and we’ve lost the respect of our adversaries around the world.
There are a number of Ambassadors who appear on hit lists--mainly for one reason--they represent the US just as much as the flag does. The fact that Stevens apparently rejected more security speaks more to bad judgment and hubris than it does a CIA connection. The Bureau of Diplomatic Security is responsible for ensuring that our diplomatic personnel, including Ambassadors, are provided security. In the case of Stevens it appears that he had a DS supplied personal protection detail. But they cannot protect an ambassador from the kind of attack that happened in Benghazi. The host government is responsible and they were AWOL for five hours.
I have no doubt that AQ and its affiliated organizations in Libya took out Stevens in retalliation for the US killing one its leaders. And no doubt, Obama and the Dems bragging about taking out OBL and Ghadaffi didn't help matters. And add the fact that this was the 11th anniversary of 9/11. There had to be collusion between the Libyan security personnel charged with the responsibility for protecting the Consulate (including both the government assigned personnel and the ones hired by the consulate) with the attackers. The security personnel just melted away when the attack started and someone must have let the attackers know the location the safe house that was attacked during the second phase of the attack.
For me, the larger story here is how derelict the State Department was in providing security for the consulate given conditions on the ground, i.e., recent attacks against Western interests in Benghazi such as the RPG attack against the UK ambassador in June, the Tunisian Embassy, the Red Cross, and the US consulate by an IED. The fact that the UK closed its consulate in Benghazi after the attack on the UK's ambassador's motorcade should have set off all kinds of alarm bells in Libya and in Washington.
The consulate was housed in an "interim facility" that had no more security than one would find in a gated community. The Ambassador was visiting Benghazi but we had 25 to 30 people assigned to the consulate. To me, this is totally unacceptable and should never have happened. Lives were put needlessly at risk. Heads should roll in the State Department. I have let our union, AFSA, know of my displeasure with this arrangement and asking them to hold Hillary and the rest of the leadership responsible for a major lapse in judgment. There has been a decided lack of outrage within the Department--at least publicly--for the failure to provide proper security for our personnel.