New ObamaGate Scandal; State Department Sold Stingers to Al Queda

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

I don't know if that means the Ambassador's murder was about it as well...or perhaps his murder WAS an accident in a kidnap for ransom attempt? It's an explanation that makes enough sense to consider ...and would END this Government across the board for leadership, if proven to have actually been a plan people on our side knew and approved of playing out, IMO.

It's worth noting in that context that Ambassador Stevens died of smoke inhalation, holed up in the safe room?

wiki

Stevens apparently became separated from his staff while trying to escape to the roof and was ultimately overcome by smoke inhalation.

Yeah, it's worth noting that. He died choking on the smoke generated by the fires the Jihadi fighters set, designed to burn him out of his safe room and into the open for capture or murder by their hands.

In the world of crime and evidence? The fires set by them resulted directly in the method of his death and, quite possibly as an intended outcome in it's own right. Either way on the final motive, action led to foreseeable consequence, which was the death of Chris Stevens. That makes the ones who set the fires and those with them, equally guilty of Murder. In this case? If we were under U.S. Law, it would be Murder in the 1st with special circumstances, several times over ..and for damn near all of them.

It is important to note those details tho..... Oh, and the staffer murdered at the State Compound, didn't die in that room. I'm figuring the bloodbath out in one of the State vehicles was his....along with the bloody hand print on an outside column. I haven't heard of any protesters being killed inside the walls...and that was A LOT of blood. It makes a reasonable assumption and a good look at what Stevens would have had, if they'd gotten him alive.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Argh...Then try this from the hearings...direct docs..

Proposed Lease for operations....8 State Department/USAID personnel...35 people in total...27 "TDY"...which is the catch-all ...TDY is the vague miltary-ops acronym "Temporary Duty"...as in "Temporary Mission Benghazi"...notice that they specifically delinated between the TDY personnell and State and USAID in the propoosal. They were proposing ONLY 8 State Department/USAID...rest spooks.

The bulk were CIA...and they can't say "CIA" in unclassified docs...so they called them the vague "Temporary Duty" Personell...but distinct from State Department or US Aid.

Later in the email exchange they discuss using SST folks for added security (Special Survelience Team) aka again CIA...

oversight.house.gov...

I don't know what all the fuss is about, they gave Al Qaeda stingers before in Afghanistan against the Russians, the same guys who took no prisoners and carried out atrocities, and nothing much has changed in warfare, like in Libya, and now in Syria, atrocities on both sides..so what's new?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I was only looking to inform your hypothesis that kidnapping might be on the table? Are you infering that I was looking to excuse the murder?

Originally posted by nosacrificenofreedom

Originally posted by Propulsion
I posted this thread some time back...

Link

If I remember correctly, Glenn Beck brought this to light.

Surprise! Your video is gone dude!
Too0 bad wanted to see it.

Those bazturds! I can't find it ANYWHERE!

Let the conspiracy commence...

I wrote this up for some friends a short while ago...

After working out of consulates and embassies in Japan, Korea, Somalia, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan, I can say the ambassador has his hands full doing all the glad-handingand daily functions as the represenative of the greatest country on earth. Checking security of a remote location is not an ambassadorial function. Security questions would have been handed off the Regional Security Officer (RSO).

So, the question is...what was the ambassador doing at an embattled consulate or ‘diplomatic mission’ as it is being called, in an area our allies had pulled out of? And, being there without a large security force.

I suggest the following. The Libyan arms cashes build up over the years were being pilfered by 'persons unknown' at this point in time. The arms, which formerly supported terrorists around the world, were going to persons or areas, which would have made an 'Iran-Contra Scandal' for the Obama administration.

I further suggest the ambassador was there without the benefit of his normal security team, because of the possibility of a intelligence leak back to the State Department or the White House. He was concerned about the information getting back to the very people who were knowledgeable of, but unavailable to assist in his survival.

That would make ‘persons unknown’ party to murder at the least and government sanction of a US Government employee at most.

reply to post by daveinats


I wonder if you could offer an opinion then. As someone who has worked in and out of Embassies, as you note.

Benghazi Photos

These aren't the Media photos of the Ambassador. None of that night at all. The last 3 are of the bloody minivan, but the first half is the wall blown out in the earlier militia attack on the compound. The second half is inside/outside and around the grounds of the compound well before the day this last attack happened. It shows the general lay out and security...or lack of it, to my lay eyes.

That is what I figured your opinion may be interesting on. What does that compound look like to you for having an Ambassador in residence for any length of time, in an unstable city?

Im new to the site, and this is my thinking on this subject.

We were there to buy back stingers, for whatever reason the deal goes wrong or it was an intended ambush from the start. It my my thinking that we did not try to rescue these men from an ongoing attack becasue we knew that they had stingers and might have had men stationed outside the airport in bhengazi to shoot down any reinforcements sent from tripoli to help and also might have some stingers around the attack area to try and shoot down any helichopters or warplanes sent to help them out. and this would have made the situation far worse from obama 2 months before and election not only haveing to explain why theses men were killed, but also how terrorists got there hands on surface to air anti-aircraft missiles, Hence the stand down order given to General Carter Ham (Commanding General USAFRICOM) and the specs ops operations in tripoli.

What do you all think of my theory?

Originally posted by Czulkang
Im new to the site, and this is my thinking on this subject.

We were there to buy back stingers, for whatever reason the deal goes wrong or it was an intended ambush from the start. It my my thinking that we did not try to rescue these men from an ongoing attack becasue we knew that they had stingers and might have had men stationed outside the airport in bhengazi to shoot down any reinforcements sent from tripoli to help and also might have some stingers around the attack area to try and shoot down any helichopters or warplanes sent to help them out. and this would have made the situation far worse from obama 2 months before and election not only haveing to explain why theses men were killed, but also how terrorists got there hands on surface to air anti-aircraft missiles, Hence the stand down order given to General Carter Ham (Commanding General USAFRICOM) and the specs ops operations in tripoli.

What do you all think of my theory?

Edit: Wrong thread

reply to post by capone1


I got a few words wrong, why would that make my post fake?

Edit: please delete

reply to post by capone1


Thanks for the welcome, and dont take this the wrong way, but what about my post seems sketchy? I'm looking for some constructive critism, haha i know i cant spellm but you get what im sayin, right?

Originally posted by Czulkang
reply to post by capone1

 

Thanks for the welcome, and dont take this the wrong way, but what about my post seems sketchy? I'm looking for some constructive critism, haha i know i cant spellm but you get what im sayin, right?

I get what you're sayin. We are a bit sensitive when people make their 1st post in defense of a person in major power. I hope you continue to voice your opinion and learn from here; although for now you are sketchy.

Wait,I thought we do not negotiate,arm,or support terrorists! I mean freedom fighters no,no the attack on the embassy was not the doing of our allies it was Al-Queda.Now that I think about it was just the work a mob offended by an anti-Islam youtube vid yeah,that's the ticket!

reply to post by Czulkang


i read your post, and it is in the correct thread.
the other poster made a mistake, not you.

A chopper can evade a stinger/or take it out with on board defensive weapons.
troops could have HALOED in.

the order to stand down in my opinion was to
allow enemy success, and to not interfere in enemy action.
the two dead seals were killed as they disobeyed the stand down order.

This is just another attempt to make a mountain out of a mole hill. The President did not personally go and sell stingers. Ever hear about personnel and officers taking inappropriate action without executive direction or knowledge? Do you remember the Iran-Contra scandal? People did not lambast President Reagan with mouth-frothing hatred over it. Sure it was wrong and he probably knew about it, but he had a fall guy who now works on Fox News (or at least worked there for a substantial amount of time if he's not there now).

Obama-haters are blaming him for every mistake that any person or organization in the federal government makes. They did not apply this same standard to previous administrations and it is painfully obvious why this hypocritical double-standard exists.

reply to post by GhostLancer


When the Captain of a naval vessels is in his quarters sleeping, and a junior officer who has the watch runs the vessel into another ship or land or what not, the Captain of the Ship is responsible, regardless.

This President seems to think that its all Bush's fault, regardless of the actions of his own staff / political appointees.

Oh imagine that a Fast and Furious 2 , It's like Iran Contra all over again, after all Obama has since adopted every failed republican policy and managed to out do Bush in tyranny. So why stop there, maybe he will sell some tactical Nukes to Kim Jong-un so he can have Iran removed from the map with that logic. If he has not all ready


Just WOW... all these scandals and the implosion of the Obummer administration is like something out of a Tom Clancy novel, just unreal. Just imagine what we don't know? The levels of corruption is almost obscene. Just give these guys pin stripe suits and tommy guns at this point so the the shoe can fit @ Gangs of Chicago / Obummer adminitration

Does anyone believe that all these scandalous events, one even brought forth by the people that were supposed to be protecting Obama's election in 2012 (IRS) are just a coincidence or that now things are just catching up with Obama's administration?

I would think the next move would be a "martyrdom" for Obama, something in the order of "this poor man is being persecuted by the GOP, anyone can see that" and then everything will start to fall apart leaving Obama to look like the persecuted martyr they will portray him as. Hillary will go down, the Dems will regain the House and keep the Senate and the rest will be history..............as they say.

Obviously this is just my opinion but this has gone way beyond coincidence and incompetence.

The story doesn't make sense. The Libyan rebels wanted, needed, and were supplied with other types of weapons, for ground combat. NATO air forces (and defecting Libyan Air Force pilots) took care of demolishing many aircraft. What would have been the need for the rebels to have SAMs?

Stinger missiles had been supplied to rebels in countries (like Afghanistan), where the rebels themselves were expected to shoot down/keep at higher altitudes an opposing air force, without the help from NATO or the US.

The State Dept did contract out to destroy Stinger-like missiles from the old Libyan govt that had fallen into the hands of rebels/militias.

The story doesn't make sense. Libya was not Afghanistan. As if using Stinger missiles would have made it "cheaper".