New ObamaGate Scandal; State Department Sold Stingers to Al Queda

In the never ending stream of scandals washing up on the steps the white house, this one, if true should prove to be a major tsunami.

nation.foxnews.com...

Many sources have claimed that there were rumors of a major major scandal that top Obama aides were fearing. In my mind none can be more scandalous nor more dangerous to Obama's Presidency

Stevens’ mission in Benghazi, they will say, was to buy back Stinger missiles from al-Qaeda groups issued to them by the State Department, not by the CIA. Such a mission would usually be a CIA effort, but the intelligence agency had opposed the idea because of the high risk involved in arming “insurgents” with powerful weapons that endanger civilian aircraft. Hillary Clinton still wanted to proceed because, in part, as one of the diplomats said, she wanted “to overthrow Gaddafi on the cheap.” This left Stevens in the position of having to clean up the scandalous enterprise when it became clear that the “insurgents” actually were al-Qaeda – indeed, in the view of one of the diplomats, the same group that attacked the consulate and ended up killing Stevens.

This is my first thread on ATS. I searched and found nothing.

reply to post by dieseldyk


This isn't new news, it's just now hitting the "mainstream" media.

As I have said many times, the United States suffers from a cancer called hypocrisy. In this particular case, we have Obama extending the 9/11 declaration of emergency for a 11th or 12th year. Seriously there is no emergency and now we can prove it. If AQ was responsible for 9/11 and we are in a state of emergency because AQ attacked us and the claim is that AQ could at anytime attack us again, then why are we arming them; with stinger missiles no less. Either AQ are now our ally and the declaration of emergency is unconstitutional or Obama is guilty of treason from trading with enemy and known terrorist organization.

Either way Obamagate now has Obama between a rock and a hard place and he can only blame hubris and hypocrisy.

I wonder how long it will be before they "admit" they were wrong about al-Qaeda being behind 9/11 and "find out" that it was _______________. My guess will be Iran. Anyone else care to wager?

How much longer is the American public in particular, going to take this BS from their own government!? al-Qaeda is the enemy, but only when it is convenient for their agenda. They donated to the FSA, hell, they even allowed Joe Public to donate...and I'm sure some idiots did, all without doing some basic homework that shows that al-Qaeda has infiltrated the FSA.

You say the government lies to people. I say people ask to be lied to because it is easier having someone tell you what to fear, how to act, who to hate, then it is to actually think for yourself.

*I'm not specifically referring to anyone when I say "you".

I have stated all along it was a weapons running/clawback, and Stephens was sacrificed because it went bad and he could blow the whistle on Obama/Hillary.

I will also state, for the record, all these other "scandals" are the work of Hillary et al to secure her election in 2016.

The idea is to get Republicans to jump the gun on Impeachment, and blow the 2014 elections. If they go after Obama at all, they should wait till after the elections. They ought not go after him at all, but instead turn the tables and do what the Dems do. Just point out that everything bad is "Dems", and run with it.


Not enough people are paying attention, if you asked most people on the street, they wouldn't know what Benghazi was about, most have never heard of it, and most don't know anything about the other "scandals" currently wracking the Whitehouse.

At this point, what difference does it make? Just some men out for a walk late one night.

So are we freedom loving patriots of American global hegemony supporting Al-Qaeda now?, I personaly am glad they are on board with the freedom and democracy thing, now maybe I can go back to liking brown people. Cause, you know for while now it was a bit touch and go what with Fox telling me they were bad.

reply to post by dieseldyk





I am loving every new day. One after another, more of the crap rises to the top on the Tyrant 0bama's Admin.

Originally posted by Libertygal


The idea is to get Republicans to jump the gun on Impeachment, and blow the 2014 elections. If they go after Obama at all, they should wait till after the elections. They ought not go after him at all, but instead turn the tables and do what the Dems do. Just point out that everything bad is "Dems", and run with it.

You have a point there.

Is this the "leak" they were so worried about?
They should be worried about this. "on the cheap"

reply to post by dieseldyk


That's a very interesting possibility and one that I'd call quite possible. Clinton was heard to reply when asked about the 2012 election, she had a legacy to see to and was't done yet. That was before Benghazi of course. THAT ended her career as such as anything could have. Prior to that though? Yeah. I think her greatest wish and dream was a 'reformed' Middle East in the most literal sense of how the map looked afterward. Pro-West and no Shia in sight with power.

Well... They failed... Miserably and utterly. The introduction of Stinger AA Missiles wouldn't shock me but for the outrageous stupidity it would represent. Stingers were given to the Mujaheddin of Afghanistan in the 1980's but with some clever twists which made them 100% worthless wall hangers after a given period of time. Give the isolation of Afghanistan (As well as need), it wasn't likely those found their way out of Afghanistan in time to still be useful elsewhere. None did..that I know of.

This??? Oh this was stupid on steroids..IF true. The systems that expire on a Stinger DO go bad and need replaced but the timelines aren't THAT short and Libya was never seen as being THAT long a war. Did we really have SO LARGE a brain fart as to think we could forcefully recover the Holy Grail of terrorist tools, after supplying them?!

I gave Hillary more credit for basic intelligence than this.

reply to post by JayinAR


Reported by Fox News.

Say......wasn't that the news organization that that one reporter was investigated by the DOJ.

Hmmmmmmm. Nah, can't be, as this admin is the most transparent ever in the history of the world, or before dirt was invented.

But, as I am sure as the sun will rise tomorrow morning....

Originally posted by JayinAR
Is this the "leak" they were so worried about?
They should be worried about this. "on the cheap"

No, the leak they were worried about was the one about Yemen, and the alleged foiled terrorist plost that was supoosed to have endangered undercover agents that had infiltrated the group.

That is, if you believe a word they say anymore.

Perhaps this has something to do with the REAL leak, they have fought tooth and nail to keep this from getting out.

reply to post by macman


Oh.. the Fox News thing is up to 3 reporters and a producer for who was targeted in investigations and no-show warrants. The plot thickens....and I guess the moral of the story is, when holding good stories? Don't sit on them. Get them out as fast and widely as possible. It's the only method of safety.

and nobody is questioning why such sensitive "insider" info on clandestine group's activities is being reported by MSM?

Can you say CYA?

Wow, this seems a bit "twisted" to me, and the only thing new in it is the shifting of the possibility of Stevens being associated with an ongoing CIA op while serving under the guise as an Ambassador..

Reminded me of a couple of older pieces... which seem related to me..

The real question about Benghazi: Was Chris Stevens a CIA agent?

What is the real question here? Judging from media coverage and the Congressional investigation, we might assume that the only matter to be resolved is whether the Obama administration knew that a coordinated terrorist attack was underway, rather than a spontaneous demonstration against an anti-Muslim film. According to this narrative, Obama could have been more proactive in responding to the attack and sent in military assistance to try to save Stevens and his associates.
None of this would seem to be the stuff of a major scandal. The Obama administration may or may not have handled the situation properly. If they didn’t and tried to cover up their incompetence, it would hardly be a new Watergate. The intensity of the controversy doesn’t jibe with its supposed cause.
Or is there another reason for a cover-up by the White House? Was Chris Stevens a CIA agent?

and this one from a bit further back, touching on an alleged rebel leader with CIA ties who was claiming to be snubbed during the Libyan uprising..

Libyan Rebel Leader with CIA Ties "Feels Abandoned"

PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Paul Jay in Washington. In Libya, a man who lived not far from Washington, Khalifa Hifter, was in Virginia for 24 years after leaving the Libyan army, where he'd been a commander. Of course, in Virginia he wasn't very far from CIA headquarters. He's now back in Libya in Benghazi, playing some kind of role in the rebellion army, or I should say the army of the rebellion. What is that role? Well, we're not entirely sure. But Shashank Bengali from the McClatchy Newspaper chain is in Benghazi, and he met with Hifter, and he asked what was his role, and here's what he found out. Thanks for joining us. Shashank joins us from Benghazi.
SHASHANK BENGALI, MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERI: My pleasure.

Full audio at the above link or you can read the transcript..



Taking this older information, and flash forwarding to today's whistleblower take on the scenario, it sure looks they are doing their best to distance the CIA from any of this, which is kinda silly since the CIA operations were/are in Benghazi, and there was no Embassy in Benghazi.. not sure if it was even a consulate myself, as that would explain the lack of adequate security, this was supposed to be a covert deal..

IIRC there were also some thoughts that Stevens was actually trying to secure as many of the shoulder fired weapons in order to transfer them to rebels fighting in Syria..


If I had to take a guess, the CIA and the State Dept are knee deep in this fiasco, and subsequent coverup.

Grain of salt for me, this new story has too much TMZ on it for me to get too excited about.. YMMV

reply to post by dieseldyk


So...in other words...this article is telling us... that the State Department provided the weapons to our enemy...that killed our people in Benghazi.

Am I understanding this correctly?

reply to post by caladonea


Sounds about right.

reply to post by JacKatMtn


But it sure goes a long way to explain this story that was quietly displayed under the tornado tragedy.

Put the pieces together. If this story is true, and the OP is true, then it was *meant* to happen the way it did, with the death of Stephens. There is simply no other explanation. What other role did the CIA play?

www.thedailybeast.com...

Exclusive: CIA Honored Benghazi Chief in
Secret Ceremony
byEliLake May21,20134:45amEDT
Part of why the State Department has taken the brunt of the political blame for the
Benghazi attack, writes Eli Lake, is that clandestine services by definition have very
little public oversight.

At a secret February ceremony at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., the chief of the
CIA’s base in Benghazi the night of the 9/11 anniversary attacks there was awarded
one of the agency’s highest intelligence medals, according to U.S. military and
intelligence officials.

Almost every day I log-in to ATS to be confronted with the latest "Gate" thread with Obama's name all over it. They always gleefully state "This will be the big one to bring him down!"

No. No it won't.

Get outraged. Work yourself up into a lather. At the end of the day he'll still be POTUS and you'll still be irritated. Rinse. Repeat.

Perhaps at some point you'll realize we're all serfs and absolutely anything you get upset about has 0 effect on anyone who is running things.

Also, can we please stop calling things Gates? It's so....annoying. Oh wait, what annoys me amounts to a hill of beans. Please carry on.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Well, Wrabbit...do you suppose there were some stingers that they were after, rather than the ambassador? We ruminated on there being something there they were after that wasn't the ambassador. Perhaps this is what that was.