Hillary Clinton Supplied Weapons from Benghazi to Al-Qaeda in Syria

a reply to: theantediluvian

True Pundit does tend to hyperbole their findings - hence the title and the stamps.

What this document might demonstrate is that one US agency saw evidence of the operations of another US agency but it's not at all clear from the document alone.

That could very well be. The arms dealer, that charges were dropped against, alleges that the Libyan rebels were armed by the US by shipping arms from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. This document could show a similar pattern of hiding the way the rebels in Syria were armed - use Libyan weapons so there's no paper trail.

Wikileaks head Julian Assange in July suggested that he had emails proving that Clinton “pushed” the “flows” of weapons “going over to Syria.”

politico

Sounds like future leaks will show that Clinton had a hand in pushing weapons to Syria. I doubt we'll ever see evidence of her directly arming them. But, I think we'll see it was quite obvious that she was.

I just want something to stick already... I feel that all the Hillary scandals have flooded the political landscape to the point where no one knows what to focus in on, and they also tend to believe no one can be "this dirty" so they begin dismissing without ever checking to see if the sources are legitimate... Its crazy how she keeps dodging everything. She's like a boxer bobbing and weaving away from every combo that's delivered her way.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: SaturnFX

For gods sake!

We armed Bin Laden and he turned on us.

This speaks to the gross incompetency of DC!

Or possibly never stopped working for us... Sometimes the illusion of opposition helps keep the war machine lubed and full throttle.

a reply to: jhn7537

Maybe you are listening to a bunch of Republicans who just are slinging unfounded accusations. Look at the Loch Ness monster. It's kind of like that.

This paper has nothing to do with the Secretary of State, yet this thread is full of people claiming otherwise. The Defense Department and State Department are two different entities. This is how ridiculous these accusations are. If you and others didn't wish them to be true, maybe you could evaluate politics from an honest perspective.

Try voting based on her record as a Senator. That is how sane, logical people evaluate a politician.

a reply to: SmashnGrab

Are you at all familiar with the significant overlaps in mission criteria of our tier one units, intelligence apparatus, and the State Department?

Not disagreeing that this doesn't show conclusive evidence of 'Hillary selling weapons', just touching on your perceived delineation between DOS and DOD.

One wonders what that annex in Benghazi was actually doing, given how murky the role that the GRS (all those contractors that were former spec ops) was.

I find it interesting that people just accept this stuff as fact.

How do we know this information is real?

a reply to: Annee

Cuz it was on the Internet, duh

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Annee

Cuz it was on the Internet, duh

LOL

Good one.

a reply to: SmashnGrab

Exactly... They threw too much snip on the wall and now they can't determine which part actually stinks.. Charging a bunch of crimes and hoping something "sticks" is shoddy at best, plus You can't get a PSYCHOPATH to jump on the sword..

Any mention of the $6B that went "missing" when She was Head of State, that money would actually do something but lets continue to look for deleted fart jokes that showed up on Her Blackberry™...

originally posted by: SmashnGrab
a reply to: ghostrager

Lol, it's talking about weapons being shipped from Qudaffi's stash, not by US, but by Libyans. Wow

Even Doc Brown knew he shouldn't be messing with those Libyans!

originally posted by: SmashnGrab
a reply to: jhn7537

Maybe you are listening to a bunch of Republicans who just are slinging unfounded accusations. Look at the Loch Ness monster. It's kind of like that.

This paper has nothing to do with the Secretary of State, yet this thread is full of people claiming otherwise. The Defense Department and State Department are two different entities. This is how ridiculous these accusations are. If you and others didn't wish them to be true, maybe you could evaluate politics from an honest perspective.

Try voting based on her record as a Senator. That is how sane, logical people evaluate a politician.

Are we talking about the same Hillary Clinton?? lol.... You really want me to go off her track record as a politician? Ummm, okay... Then I guess anyone but her would be the LOGICAL thing to do, well, unless you want the status quo of the "establishment" to maintain a stranglehold on this country....

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: SaturnFX

For gods sake!

We armed Bin Laden and he turned on us.

This speaks to the gross incompetency of DC!

agreed!! just look at the avatar!!

a reply to: JimNasium

Even that missing $6 B is BS. The IG announced right away that the newspapers were misreporting the report.

Here is the statement direct from the inspector general:
www.washingtonpost.com... cdd700b3a4c

a reply to: jhn7537

Senator Clinton was ranked the 11th most liberal Senator during her 8yrs. If you don't like liberal politicians, than you won't like her. She agreed with Bernie 93% of the time.

But, yes, evaluating a politician who has an 8yr voting record in the recent past is the appropriate way to be an informed voter. Just because you can't do that with Trump does not make it wrong to do that for her. That is how informed voters learn about the candidates. Listening to the ratings based news is like reading the National Enquirer. It's worse because they pretend they are providing news, but it is opinions.

a reply to: Nemtaku

You know that photo is from a photoshop contest, right? It was the winner of a photoshop contest in 2007.

www.snopes.com...

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: SaturnFX

For gods sake!

We armed Bin Laden and he turned on us.

This speaks to the gross incompetency of DC!

How can the war machine keep rolling along if they have no one to fight? We are the new Romans if we don't have an enemy to fight we will create one.

I would say it is far worse than that. There has always been a stigma around Benghazi and why both Obama and Clinton not only lied repeatedly, but forced others to lie (Rice) to cover up...something. There were rumors about some form of CIA gun trafficking and wanting to hide that from the public and others. And while the facts are not quite there yet, I am considering this.

Obama and/or Clinton were illegally providing guns/weapons to rebels (or someone) and when our Embassy (US soil) was attacked, they decided to build a lie to cover up their actions. As usual, the lie then required further lies to cover up the original. It became a criminal conspiracy (yeah...my words) when they ordered other individuals to lie, continued lying to the families of the dead, lied to the people of the country, lied to congress...Hell...lied to everyone that was listening.

If this conspiracy is ever fully vetted...Obama and Clinton are done for. IMHO.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the operation in Benghazi was a State Department gun running / fighter transporting op from Libya to Syria, nothing more. Hell, there wasn't even a semblance of a government there that needed the attendance of an "Ambassador"!

I'd go so far as to say Ambassador Stevens was no more an Ambassador than I am a potential next papal candidate!
Likewise, the "private security" were nothing more than hired mercs protecting an illegal operation of the State Department outside the normal channels of the US government. Why else would they use them instead of US military personnel for diplomatic mission protection, if not to keep prying eyes away from something they should not have been doing?

No wonder they kept the military away and didn't call them in to help!

But hey, at least they got to capitalise on the resulting deaths and even make a film about it portraying them as All-American Heroes, helping to protect America..... blah blah blah!

a reply to: ManFromEurope

There are three things that I hate about our world currently with regards to subjects such as this. One, Trump is a #bag. Two, HRC cannot be trusted. Through the Uranium One deal, she harmed our country, committed treason and malprison of treason (Bill was POTUS, she obviously informed him of her actions and both received kickbacks).
The third infuriates me and that is when Europeans chime in on our political climate. Why? You don't live here, can't vote to find a solution, can't even manage your own country's affairs. UK is a damn mess, Scotland is in bed with the Brits...William Wallace is rolling in his grave, Germany, France and at LEAST three other nations are blowing up from the whole immigration thing. As if you people have anything of value to add. NOPE! But, four times out of 10 some wanker on ATS is talking smack in defense of a candidate THEY DON'T KNOW OR HAVE TO DEAL WITH. So, shut it!! Deal with your own country's state of affairs before you come into our discussions. ENOUGH!
I hate Clinton but Trump is cozy with Russia which may save us from WWIII. Clinton will # us all even if she had nothing to do with this arm's shipment. It's DoD, not SECSTATE. duh.

a reply to: ColdChillin

Regarding your third point, we in Europe are dictated to by the US so it's very much in our interests who is in charge and what they are doing.
Right now, your bat-sh!t crazy government and wannabe politicians in the armed forces are pushing more and more towards a war with Russia. Guess where that will be fought..... yeah, in Europe, not in America!

So, quit whining and maybe keep off the meds a while and you might actually learn about the world and why we are concerned

a reply to: SaturnFX
of course Bush, Bill and Reagan did the same but they are not running for president right now as we speak. Hillary is running for president and she was involved in this specific situation. so i think its fair that we blame her. should we just say "oh well every president has done it, who cares lets vote her in."? or should we blame her?