BENGHAZI, TREASON, MURDER, AND GREED

Al Qaeda with the humanitarian aid we send them

There is so much information emerging now about the Benghazi debacle and so many are publishing their own explanation of events. I am no exception, but like to think that while others see only the trees immediately before them, I can see the forest, and it is a forest dark and gloomy where deceit and treachery grows like weeds upon the ground.

The basis for most essays on the topic is the great hue and cry that Obama was involved in gunrunning. Of course he was. We knew about that a year and a half ago.  In this article from Fox on April 22, 2011 Traitor McCain,(always in search of a news team with a video camera) was in Libya touting what heroes the terrorists of Al Qaeda were and calling for still more military hardware in their assault on Libya. The Headline:
"McCain Calls for More Military Support to Anti-Qaddafi Force During Libya Visit"


Note the above date of the article April 22. Ambassador Stevens(At that time, CIA operative Stevens) had already arrived in Libya along with a support team of twelve other CIA agents, and a ship full of armament on the night of April 5. As facts emerge we may find that there were many more shipments of arms prior to April 22 but it is certain that we had already sent at least one cargo ship full of arms and ammunition to Al Qaeda prior to that date. How many arrived after that with McCain's prodding has yet to be revealed as well.

The Fox article linked above presents a problem: Half truths. They use the word "rebels" to describe McCain's heroes. They were not rebels, they were invaders, at least a great many of them were. They were Al Qaeda, and related groups, from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Egypt. Rebels, by definition, are citizens seeking to overthrow an existing government. Al Qaeda does not fit into that category. Granted, some Libyans almost certainly joined in the conflict, but by and large, the bulk of the people from Libya did not welcome the idea of living under an Islamic regime, and remained loyalists. 

As bad as Qaddafi was, Islamic rule is far worse. Doubt that statement? Those loyalist kept fighting for an independent Libya long after Qaddafi had been murdered. That is not "rebels", These men continued fighting in hopes of preserving what little freedom they had under a dictator as opposed to all they would lose under Sharia.

Now we see the same exact thing occurring in Syria with John McCain once again beating the drum for more military involvement. And that, will bring us up to Benghazi and the death of Ambassador Steven and his subordinates.

Many have now already learned that Stevens, while on assignment in Libya, was wearing two hats. He first entered that war torn nation as a leading CIA operative whose goal it was to arm the "rebels". After the fall of Qaddafi, Barrack Obama and his mentor saw fit to recruit Stevens, as their operative, in the guise of ambassador. He was not really cut out for the job. Stevens was more a nuts and bolts kind of guy, or perhaps I should say a guns and ammo kind of a guy. Being a natural born Spook his loyalties remained with the CIA.

In a previous article "Benghazi: Two Conflicting Agendas ... One Dead Ambassador", I laid out the only scenario thus far that answers all of those "Whys" that Glenn Beck asked, including the biggest mystery of all ... Why was a drone shadowing the CIA outpost before the battle ever began? That link is repeated in Suggested Reading and if you have not already read it truly hope that you will. I learned long ago that if an essay is too long, it will not be finished, and since this topic is of vital importance, huge, and convoluted, I have chosen to present it in multiple parts.

First a brief scenario of the contents of my other essay and then I shall lay the groundwork for the whole sordid mess that occurred on our most recent 911 attack. 

In the previous essay I described how Ambassador Stevens remained committed to his CIA assignment which was to collect all possible weapons that we had provided, and possibly those liberated from the Qaddafi regime as well, and forward them to the next CIA target of opportunity ... Syria. Obama had different plans. He took office intent on three things: Bringing the United States to its knees, reestablishing the Islamic Caliphate, and destroying Israel. Thus, there were two agenda in play: The CIA's plan for Syria via Ambassador Stevens, and George Soros' plan for the ruin of the U.S. and Israel via Barrack Hussein Obama.

Conflicting agendas in that part of the world is a recipe for disaster, and death.

Four years ago, no one could have forecast this turn of events, but as they say "In hindsight we all see in 20-20 vision, and so I shall map the events that led to 911 Part Two.

One of Obama's first acts in office was to call Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey. Turkey was once on good terms with Israel. Now Erdogan seems intent on reestablishing the Caliphate in Istanbul. Obama is totally in line with this plan. 

On 02/21/09 World Net Daily runs the story that the Obama administration is giving $900,000,000.00 to Hamas. You know, I know, and Obama knew, what Hamas would do with that kind of money. Obama was now arming a group that posed a danger to Israel and long acknowledged by the U.S. as being a terrorist organization.

The famed "Apology Tour", was used to humiliate America and praise the so called "contributions" of Islam. The Qur'an calls for other nations to humble themselves before Islam. That tour of his began the process. With it he empowered our enemies, and denigrated the greatest nation on earth before a group of primitive tribesmen who cannot even feed themselves.

The famed Peace Prize he received for nothing, confused many. Had we known more about George Soros at the time it would not have. Check "Soros and Egypt"(It is brief) in Suggested Reading. Soros has a way of getting that prize for his loyal followers. It gives them stature and increases the loyalty.

Obama's demands(Unrealized) that Israel withdraw to pre 1967 borders would have divided Israel and made that nation totally indefensible.

Obama demanded that the Muslim Brotherhood be present for his Cairo Speech. The MB had been outlawed from Egypt for many years, for good reasons. They destabilize any nation where they manage to gain any degree of power. Once they had established a foothold it was not long before Obama was demanding that Mubarak step down. Now Egyptians live under the rule of the MB. Later he called for Qaddafi to step down, and they are ruled by one of the branches of Al Qaeda. Now it is Assad who must be toppled from power. He is unseating dictators and installing Sharia ... one nation at a time.

Obama warned that he was going to transform America. It would appear that he plans to transform the world.

Then there is Israel ... The wild card! Netanyahu does not bow before Obama, but for the Soros/Obama agenda to play out, Israel must fall, and the plan behind that is what I discussed in my previously mentioned essay.

So many of these great reveals being done by fellow journalist base everything on one fact. Gun running was rampant. The following is only one example of much the same theme:

Headline...Western Journalism
Obama Arming Islamic Jihadists 
Excerpt: "Obama has been running guns to Islamic Jihadists and the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, using Ambassador Christopher Stevens as middle man in the nefarious enterprise." 

Headline ... Jihad Watch
Was Ambassador Steven running guns to the Jihadist rebels who murdered him?
Jihad Watch does not purport to have all of the answers but they ask some excellent questions: 
Excerpt: "Why would rebels kill the man who was supplying them with weapons?"
My answer: He was no longer supplying them with weapons. His assignment had changed and existing weapons in Libya were now being routed by boat to Turkey then overland to the Syrian border.
Another excellent thought from Jihad Watch: 
Excerpt: "Why would Obama turn on Muammar Ghadafi, who had abandoned his nuclear and biological weapons program in compliance with the U.S. demands and with whom he had been working specifically to tamp down the very al Qaeda insurgents who were spreading though Libya like a cancer?"

Recent research has led me to so many "Whys" and this is one of the best. Why would Obama turn on a fellow Muslim, allow him to be deposed and murdered? The answer is what I mentioned early in this essay. Obama seeks to establish a Caliphate, presumably in the homeland of his friend Prime Minister Erdogan. Dictators do not fit into his plans. Al Qaeda does.

The same question could be asked about Mubarak. The answer to that is Mubarak was also a dictator and on good terms with Israel. That coziness did not fit into the Obama agenda. Mubarak had to go. Make room for Sharia, and establish another enemy for Israel. Oh, the joy when a plan comes together!

One further thought on why Al Qaeda would choose to kill the Ambassador. The Western mind holds a sort of awe for the dedication that many Muslims show for their beliefs. After all suicide bombers certainly show a zeal. One issue that the people of the west are overlooking is the fundamental greed of most of humanity. It matters not whether a group of people are Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, or Atheists. Put before them a chance to make fifty million dollars and someone will step forward to claim the prize.

Secretary of State Clinton has been transferring massive amounts of U.S. dollars to Hamas. 
Stevens and his associates were murdered for the weapons they had stored in those two warehouses. Those weapons were then sent on an overland journey to Hamas. Some were surely intercepted by Egypt but enough get through to make arms dealing very attractive to an Islamic warlord.

Many have suggested that perhaps Obama had been involved in arranging the Benghazi attack. I doubt it, but he was the ultimate beneficiary of a warlord's greed. The warlord got his payment, and by allowing the murders and subsequent weapons theft, Obama made certain that the weapons were sent to where he wanted them.

One at a time Barrack Obana is crushing strong man governments and delivering them into the hands of Sharia. He needs another four years to see this nightmare scenario come to fruition, and with the birth of the Caliphate must come the death of Israel, and it was the Israel factor that cost the lives of four Americans. The final stage presents yet another convolution in this whole picture that seems almost indecipherable.

Now that Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya have come under Sharia it is desirable to have a certain amount of stability. Too many loose weapons prevent that. Both Stevens and Obama were intent on removing much of the weaponry from Libya, but the Ambassador wanted them routed to Syria, while Obama wants them moved to Gaza to used in the defeat of Israel.

If Obama had intervened in the attack on the CIA compound and annex, American lives could have been saved, but then the weapons would not have been stolen, and people in Gaza were waiting for their next delivery, and so the order was given to Stand Down. 

Suggested Reading...
Benghazi: Two Conflicting Agendas ... One Dead Ambassador
Soros and Egypt
The Coming Caliphate
Our Next War...Syria
The New Gate Keepers ... Information on money sent to Islam