Why Did Al-Qaeda Target Ambassador Stevens?
Most of the questions related to the Benghazi debacle are about the mechanics, both offensive and defensive. What did the White House know and when? What assets were available to the military? Did someone order a stand down, and if so, who? Why was “the video” blamed long after the administration knew the truth — and didn’t the administration know the truth from the beginning? If it didn’t, why didn’t it?
All reasonable questions, but a generally unasked one deserves attention: “Why did al-Qaeda want to kill Ambassador Chris Stevens?”
The ambassador had good relations with some of the most extreme Libyan militias, including those with al-Qaeda ties. Did he upset them with something he did, or didn’t do? Was the White House fully apprised of his connections and dealings with the militias? Was he killed because of something the administration told him to start doing or to stop doing?
There are things we know and things upon which we must speculate, including the entry of surface-to-air missiles to the Levant.
———————————–
Emerging from the chaos is a dim understanding that the U.S. was operating a clandestine arms operation from the CIA post that was loosely — and incorrectly — described as a “consulate.” Before and during the revolution, Ambassador Stevens had helped arm the anti-Gaddafi militias, including the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIF), whose leader Abdulhakim Belhadj later became the head of the Tripoli Military Council.
The LIF’s Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi told an Italian newspaper in 2011 (later reported in the British Telegraph) that he had fought the “foreign invasion” in Afghanistan. Captured in Pakistan, al-Hasidi was handed over to the U.S. and returned to Libya, where he was released from prison in 2008. Speaking of the Libyan revolution, he said:
Members of al-Qaeda are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader.
Belhadj met with Free Syrian Army representatives in October 2011 to offer Libyan support for ousting Assad. Throughout 2011 and 2012, ships traversed the Mediterranean from Benghazi to Syria and Lebanon with arms for the Syrian rebels. Turkish and Jordanian intelligence services were doing most of the “vetting” of rebel groups; in July 2010, the Washington Post reported that the CIA had no operatives on the ground and only a few at border posts even as weapons were entering Syria. Said a U.S. official, addressing the question of even non-lethal aid:
We’ve got to figure out who is over there first, and we don’t really know that.
In August, a report by Tony Cartalucci, a supporter of the Syrian nationalist opposition, detailed the extent of Libyan and al-Qaeda involvement in Syria, calling it a “foreign invasion.” In November, the Washington Post noted a $20 million contribution by the Libyan government to the Syrian National Council — of which the Muslim Brotherhood is a member.
Ambassador Stevens would have known all of that; he was the go-to man. He didn’t seem to have a problem with it, so why did they want to kill him?
“Why Did Al-Qaeda Target Ambassador Stevens?”
Who cares?
Better question: Why did his own employers leave him completely in the wind, to twist.
i think a better question is why is the usa giving weapons to al qaeda. thats the true question that rankles me. arent we in a state of defacto war (if such is possible against a group rather than a nation state)against them?
Notice how Senators McCain and Graham are the ones who get the TV interviews and they only focus on our lack of response to aid our fellow Americans who were murdered and the blaming of the video for the attacks. They support arming the rebels, so it looks like nobody in Congress will ask the question – why were we arming the rebels, who are the rebels, friend or FOE?
Remember McCain was the one who tore into Michelle Bachmann for daring to question Houma Abedin’s motives and credentials. We will never get the full truth about what is going on.
Neither are friends – both are foes. Bigger question is the sunni/shia thing. Shia’s are a minority and exist on in large numbers in Iran and Syria is Iran’s only ally. Sunni’s are probably the agents trying to take over Syria, so it is probably a larger sunni imperialist expansionism play.
As for Chris Stevens? I still believe it was a botched kidnapping. Egypts PM kept insisting that we release the blind shiek. Once Stevens was savaged by his over zealous captors the PM shut up about that real fast.
I, too, believe — if I have to guess — that it was a botch kidnapping. I base this on the presumed fact the CIA Annex was attacked only because the attackers believed Ambassador Steven had been transported there from the consulate. When he was eventually found and finally taken to the hospital, most of the CIA Annex attackers left to go surround the hospital, only finally closing up shop around the CIA Annex when Stevens was pronounced dead. The mortar barrage took place during the winding down of the incident.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Good question. Try this. Syria and Iran are not going to stand by and allow America to overthrow their governments with their gun running operations. Who did you think they were, Mexico?
If Obama has shipped up to 15,000 MANPADs and STINGERs to nodes of the Al Quaeda network, couldn’t you expect to see them someday on the roadways near airport approaches all over America, and all at once?
As I was reading that particular passage I thought “Ah yes – and coming to an airport near you”. I wonder how Obozo will explain that.
He will do as he always does, blame Bush!
The only upside to the alleged disappearance of thousands of MANPADs is that US will no longer need the TSA.
We still have not seen the autopsy report on Ambassador Stevens. We don’t know whether he died of smoke inhalation, as reported; or was he brutalized and murdered as speculated. Why are they hiding the report? What don’t they want us to know?
It was a kidnapping gone wrong. He was to be captured alive and traded to the US for Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman AKA “The Blind Sheikh”.
Ever since his Cairo Speech Obama has proven what complete ass he is when it comes to foreign policy. The situation will only get worse now that he has been re-elected.
Or as he told Medvedev…
Or as he said in his victory speech, “the best is yet to come.”
Theories abound, but there is more than enough reason to believe the following – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/11/11/benghazigate-theory-revealed-at-this-blog-shored-up-by-lt-col-ralph-peters-overall-theory-leading-to-petraeus-resignation-too-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/
And while everyone, who thinks they know all that there is to know, will be in for more surprises to come, the fact of the matter is, the Islamist-in-Chief (and his surrogates) is not operating in America’s interests.
Whether or not his full treachery will be revealed in time to save America, is another matter. But it will be exposed. Hopefully, sooner than later!
– Bibi waiting for?
Free version of The Movie 2016
online at: http://vimeo.com/m/51569342
I guess no one wants to be labelled homophobic for bringing this up: Ambassador Stevens was gay, not exactly “kosher,” so to speak, in the Muslim world. I can’t fathom why any American administration would station a gay Ambassador in a Middle East hot spot. It seems to me that Steven’s sexual orientation — irrelevant in most situations — highly compromised his position in a severely homophobic country, where they hang gays.
Is Steven’s sexual orientation relevant or irrelevant in this conversation?
Homosexuality is RAMPANT in Islamic countries they just like to PRETEND it isn’t. The ones who get hung are those whose noses don’t fit POLITICALLY. Women are virtually held hostage in their homes in Islamic countries and only allowed out with male family members as escorts. When a Muslim woman marries her father transfers CONTROL of her from him to her new husband.
So far from being a detriment rampant Islamic homosexuality is most probably the reason why the Middle East was Ambassador Stevens preferred posting.
Probably one reason why both Stevens and Gaddafi were raped before or during their murders.
Let me get this straight, the first President with a muslim background goes on an apology tour to the middle east, says he feels their pain and he will be more respectful and considerate of their religious beliefs. He then appoints an unattractive feminist, rumored to now be a lesbian, as Sec. of State to deal with these guys and compounds it with an ambassador whose a known homosexual, and he wonders why they’re pissed-off. You can’t make this stuff up.
you’re quite correct to say that homosexual behavior is rampant in islamic countries. the difference is that they dont celebrate it like we do.
I agree Ambassador Stevens’ sexual orientation is an issue. Thanks for bringing it up.
I know that “closet” (dance boys?) homosexuality is rampant in the ME. But “officially” it’s off-limits. It’s astonishing, in this context, that Ambassador Stevens was stationed there. We all know that closet gays are the most vehement against gays. It preserves their cover.
KJH, I asked a similar question on Fundamental Refounding, a post titled “General Petraeus.” The answer was interesting, and I invite you to go there and look. There is so much about this that really stinks, and IMO that Ambassador was assassinated.. But why?
With the revelation that the CIA was holding militant prisoners at the annex perhaps the plan was to capture Stevens and go down the road and offer a swap. Unfortunetly Stevens died of smoke inhalation rendering that plan moot. Just a wild ass guess of course.
Thanks for your comment, Jerseyglnny. Could you provide a link to the Breitbart posting.
Sorry, could you provide the link at Fundamental Refounding? Thanks!
I’m convinced that due to both Obama’s upbringing and his background in academia, he holds a dangerous perception of the Middle East. I believe Obama thinks that the problems of the Middle East are similar to that of Africa, arising from a colonialist history and mentality. That is why he has cooled relations with Israel, a Western nation which he perceives as colonial. He has supported our enemies against regimes which were either friendly to us or fearful of us (To be fair, there was some ambiguity in the goals of the perpetrators of the Arab Spring). On the other hand, he did not support the Green Revolution in Iran.
He should have supported a Persian popular movement against an Arabized regime hostile to our interests, but he supported Arab popular movements against regimes compliant with our interests. I believe he didn’t support the Green Revolution because they were rebelling against the anti-colonialists in power. Being anti-colonialist makes the current regime the legitimate leaders of the Iranian people, in Obama’s mind.
When you can’t even name your enemy (Islam) because you have a Politically Correct Regime in charge and a Muslim as President. Then its impossible to fight and impossible to make coherent excuses when the said ‘enemy who cant be named’ kicks your *ss while your Benghazi Bottler USURPER of a President looks the other way, goes to bed and then goes to Vegas to campaign.
Breitbart has an interesting theory from Petraeus’ mistress up on their page.
Two General Officers and the CIA Director all dismissed under strange circumstances so far. I bet this cover up takes up a whole lot of Administration time in the next term.
Yep. I’m sure they’re working furiously now to find/invent affairs for the General and the Admiral right now.
I haven’t been in Chicago in 30 years, and I still remember this stink.
I have been listening to the radio this morning and there endless stories about General Petraeus affair and virtually nothing about the Benghazi affair. The question that keeps coming to mind is: “Has the world gone mad?!”
That is by design. Petraeous is ruined. Obama made sure that just enough salacious information gets leaked to ensure a feeding frenzy. The only thing they didn’t count on was the fact that the FBI and Obama knew for months about the affiar and didn’t force the retired General to resign (See Michael Ledeen). Petreaous offered a humiliating resignation letter when he didn’t have to (again see Ledeen).
And like you observed, no one is now talking about Benghazi. Petraeous has been neutralized. Mission Accomplished.
How sickening.
Perhaps this tragic episode all comes down to panic. The administration was arming Al Qaida in Syria and Lybia. For whatever reasons, Al Qaida turns on the US and attacks the mission in Benghazi. With the election only 6 weeks away, the President panics and follows the advice of his political team and abandons Stevens (against the advice of both Petraeous and 2 high ranking officers). The next several weeks are spent cleaning up the political mess. The Media blacks out the affair until the elections are over, and as it turns out most voters didn’t care one way or another. Patreous and the generals are dispatched into retirement and all that’s left is stonewalling the House GOP.
I hope these people can sleep at night.
I think that you and Adina Kutnicki make a lot of sense.
It was gun-running, and Obama arming rebels/Al Qaeda. With regard to Petraeus, it was pure malice on Obama’s part. He’s a vicious, malicious narcissist, and if you cross him, he’ll destroy you.
As you point out, the talk now, is all about Petraeus. Not a word about Benghazi. Oh, and nothing about Obama.
It fits, that’s why they didn’t want the CIA to show their faces. If they did everyone would be able to figure out what the CIA is doing over there. If they did not show up it would only be an attack on the embassy and gun running would not see the light of day.
Obama doesn’t care if we find out about the gun running but he couldnt have his anti-war leftist base find lest they not vote for him. In the end it didn’t matter, the leftist will vote for anyone on the left no matter how many wars they start. Where else to they have to go.
8. chuck ‘Has the world gone mad?!’
No, chuck, it is just that those in power know that their power,
and hence their world, will end soon. When the world economy crashes,
and the world’s population feels the pain of it, many of the existing administrations will fall, as will a good few of the governments
they represent, and those who survive the fall will find themselves
living in an a much diminished replacement reality.
‘Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die.’
Um, isn’t all that proof of madness?
Or just good old fashioned malice.
Ptraeus was sleeping with someone on our side. I fail to see the huge national security threat and blackmail potential.
Hillary’s close assistant Huma Abedin has close ties to our enemies and it’s a non story.
When a democrat has an affair it’s “just sex”, no big deal, move along, nothing to see here.
But, when some one who can be used to distract from the Obama administration’s incompetence has an affair it is earth shaking news. And a significant number of Americans buy into it.
What have we become?
True, Clinton’s affairs, JFK’s affairs = no problem with blackmail; just sex; nothing to see here; private life; what are you, prudes??
Petraeus affair? Off with his head!!
How do we really know that the delectable Paula was really on our side? She could have been working for the ‘Little Father’ in Moscow. Remember what he did for a living before he went into politics? Why, Paula looks like she went to ‘swallow school’ at one time. Keep in mind that moles are moles. Consider Aldrich Ames and his wife. Consider all the others that worked for the KGB. Jim Angleton was certain that there were Soviet moles in our government. Remember the Venona Papers? They detailed all manner of Soviet infiltration over the years.
If recent reports are to be believed, Petraeus was revealing state secrets to his mistress. Forget blackmail; he violated his oath of office in a most egregious way. If he was lying on his reports to the president, that makes it all even worse. Regardless, the man has no honor; why anyone is defending him is beyond me.
Someone with courage and in a position of power must have the desire and bravery to speak up and apply the Laws now on the books against everything Obama and his people have done.
Until someone who will follow the letter of the law takes charge of this it will continue until it becomes that big snowball from hell.
Ha, wishful thinking. Everyone is so interested in saving their behinds that none of this will ever come to anything. The Democrats will run circles around any Republican that tries to make an issue of this. You can only find courage in our young men on the battlefield and the older who served in the same positions as well. The Dems motto is honor among thieves and they honor it.
We should also be wondering why Ambassador Stevens was in Benghazi in the first place. I also wonder if it had anything to do with all those missing shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles that went missing after the fall of Gaddafi. Some sources say that as many as 10,000 of these Russian-made missiles are missing and many of them could be in the hands of the various Libyan militia groups. Was Stevens trying to buy any of them back so that they wouldn’t fall into the hands of al Qaeda terrorists? Or, better yet, was he trying to buy them back so that they could be given to rebel groups fighting in Syria? I wouldn’t put anything past this administration. Nothing at all. All I do know is there must have been some reason Stevens was determined to stay in Benghazi, even though he knew (through e-mails) that the security situation there was deteriorating rapidly. There is much more here than meets the eye, and a stupid YouTube video had NOTHING to do with the attack in Benghazi.
Yes. And his last meeting the evening of his death was with the Turkish Ambassador. Curious this meeting had to be held in Benghazi and not in Tripoli where the embassy is, no?
the article asks below its title: “Was he murdered for reasons other than being an American on 9/11?” Well… duh.
Let’s suppose it goes like this?
Stevens: Sorry Hillary, but every effort to secure/purchase those 10,000 Libyan MANPADS has come to naught.
Hillary: Where are they now?
Stevens: As far as we can tell, the XX% we’ve been unable to secure are in the hands of the Islamists. We’ve got XX% here in the annex.
I don’t believe the Obama administration could have weathered that announcement.
Gadaffi had made peace with the West and was NOT an enemy of America. In fact, Gadaffi had his photo taken many times with Western leaders. Gadaffi was fighting AGAINST AL-Qaeda which was clearly UNACCEPTABLE to US/NATO. The U.S. joined up with Al-Qaeda against Gadaffi and Libya. US/NATO PROUDLY won the war for Al-Qaeda and other radical Muslim terrorists.
The U.S. ambassador was killed in a very similar fashion to Gadaffi. Gadaffi was hunted down by an American aircraft enabling Gadaffi’s capture who was then physically attacked and violently sexually attacked by U.S. supported, anti-Gadaffi Muslims.
Whatever happened to the great nation of America? That shining city on the hill admired by the whole world? The tears of millions will never bring it back.
Agree with this!
More precisely, Qaddafi, like Mubarak, had made peace with the previous Administration, and was no longer actively acting against Israel. (At least, not openly.)
These are two “crimes against humanity” that The One simply will not tolerate. Being in any way “pro-Western” in that region is anathema to Him, as it shows a lack of appreciation of “Eastern mystical enlightenment”.
Hence his deposing of Mubarak and Qaddafi, and their replacement with “true enlightened leaders”- namely the Muslim Brotherhood. No, He does not really believe they are “secular”; if they were, He would want nothing to do with them.
The One went on a Magical Mystery Tour of Indonesia and points East in His youth, and mentally has never come back to Earth. He genuinely believes that the “Mystic East” holds all answers to all human ills, if we stupid, materialistic Westerners will just stop being so f***ing rational all the time.
As soon as we admit that 2+2= anything except 4, that water can run uphill if we believe hard enough (no pumps allowed), and that the Moon is really a god, all will be well.
And if a bunch of innocent people die in the process, well, you know what Bonaparte said about omelets.
clear ether
eon
That is what “they” do. Remember Lawrence of Arabia??
Whatever the reasons, he should have extra protection on 911 in an Islamist war torn country.
Remember! Libya did not attack us on September 11! It’s the fault of that darn Bush who, again, is meddling where he does not understand.
Change!
Why was Stevens in Beghazi meeting with a “Turkish” official, alone? The answer to that one seems too sad to contemplate … no matter what; we will see an unfolding of a corruption that will probably astound us …. … and in the process steel our resolve as Americans.
I used to warn left-wingers that if they succeed in their darkest dreams for America that they would be responsible for unleashing an evil upon the world like none that had ever been seen before. I still believe that.
-Sutekh, speaking to The Doctor, in Pyramids of Mars (1975)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramids_of_Mars
Your definition of “good” isn’t always the same as somebody else’s. It rather depends on whether or not you share the same values system.
Progressives, as a rule, have one that is barely recognizable to anyone accustomed to Western “Enlightenment” values. And the progressive definition of what that word itself means is fundamentally different as well.
In short, what you see as a bug (or maybe a potential Gojira), they see as a “feature”.
Bear this in mind when attempting to fathom their motivations, and the actions which proceed from same.
clear ether
eon
Is anyone in the Obama administration listening?
July 8, 2012
Someone can be excused for falling off a cliff if they did not know it was there. However, when you can see it clearly and there are signs all over the place warning you, that person is obviously clueless, no excuses.
It is reported that Egypt’s new president ordered the dissolved Islamist-led parliament on Sunday to reconvene until a new one was elected, challenging the authority of the military generals who had dismissed the assembly based on a court ruling.
Previously, I pointed out that the Obama administration appear to be clueless when it comes to the Arab Spring and Egypt’s revolution.
In November 2011, I opined that, “What I see is this: The Islamists are using NATO and the United States to do their job for them. We are being played for fools! We are assisting them in removing the obstacles that prevented them from controlling Egypt, Tunisia and Libya.”
Again in November 2011 I opined that, “Here we go again! No Clue Administration! It is reported that the White House on Nov. 22 called for an end to the “deplorable” violence in Egypt and said elections there must go forward. As I eluded to in a previous post, Egypt is headed for Islamist rule.
This means that rather than a stabilizing force in the Middle East, Egypt will be transformed into an anti-U.S. country that aids our enemies in the region. Who needs new enemies when you can make your own out of old friends?”
Well, why is it that the Obama administration with all the evidence in front of them and in plain sight continues to act as if they have “no clue”?
Why does it matter? Unless you have your head in the sand for most of your life, it is as plain as the nose on your face. The Islamists’ have one thing in mind for us. Total control! Who stands in their way? Israel and the West primarily. Islamist control of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Gaza emboldens them to attempt to attack Israel and Western interests. Add Iran into the equation and you have a high likelihood of the United States going to war. And, I am not taking about a PC one!
The election of Mohamed Mursi as the country’s new president and the recent scenes in Tahrir Square show that Egypt is heading for an Islamist model, writes Galal Nassar in the Al-Ahram Weekly.
“It is important to bear in mind that the Muslim Brotherhood is not a national movement. It is a transnational movement, par excellence. It has branches throughout the Islamic world, and it operates with a mentality not dissimilar to Leninism. Therefore, the Brotherhood’s control over Egypt, when combined with the prospect of their solidarity with their “brethren” elsewhere, could have enormous repercussions for the region and the world.”
Is anyone listening?
One dollar will make you a millionaire if you know that this “hit” was made from the oval office! Think about it? Duh!
“The Levant is not isolated to Afghanistan……” No kidding! Afghanistan is not in the Levant which is restricted to countries bordering the Eastern Mediterranean from Turkey to through Egypt.
Mr Stevens is nothing more than a deceased money supplier to elect Obama,so it didn’t work out that great for him.The rest of the USA is going to find out in due time that in reelecting Obama the result isn’t any better.You just can’t fix STUPID.
A major portion of this is the overall fit of Libya to al Qaeda doctrine. Going by The Management of Savagery, the methodology of al Qaeda is to utilize a weak State, destabilize it either to gain power or to just gain equipment to spread jihad to weak neighbors. MANPADs are very useful against a State with an air force (like Syria) and utilizing them to neutralize that air power then leaves a remainder of MANPADs from that regime (if overthrown) to then go to the next weakest State that has an air force (Jordan say).
On the other side border tribes friendly to supplying al Qaeda in Libya (the Berbers were cited as moving French arms to AQIM) allows for the funneliing of weapons to them in neighboring states… like Mali. Additionally as Libya is a basically tribal Nation, and the tribes cross-borders, a number of regime elements in the military left Libya for other States. There is suddenly a power balance change amongst tribes in a number of States with increasing ethnic tensions that AQIM can exploit to spread jihad. Libya is a win-win-win situation for AQIM.
Why kill Ambassador Stevens?
Why not? He isn’t needed any more now that the arms are flowing. He was necessary at the start and during the conflict to get the arms moving into Libya, and then to Syria, but now this is a self-sustaining cycle. Who he knew and what he knew could start to uncover those contacts, those shipments and undo things. Can’t have that!
You are on the right track with MANPADS, now look at the point in which they changed hands. There are confirmations by both the Russians and the US Department of State that MANPADS are actually in the theatre of operations in Syria. The problem occurs with Al-Qa’ida being in that theater of operations as well. Its feared that those MANPADS fell into the hands of Al-Qa’ida. Ms. Nuland, of the Department of State confirmed Russian SA7s were in Syria and Russia, confirmed there were US made Stingers (MANPADS) in Syria. Imagine what occurs if these weapons wind up in the hands of Terrorists. That is most likely what occurred in the Syrian situation. From all the daily briefings by US sources and all the reporting from the ground in Syria, it appears as though Al-Qa’ida intercepted the MANPADS which are most likely now in their possession.
Imagine what Terrorist can do with several hundred and quite possibly thousand MANPADS in their possession. The devastation they can cause to civilian airliners is astronomical. And what better time for them to acquire these weapons from the bungling of the Obama administration, just before Christmas, the largest holiday travel season in the year. If these MANPADS are in Al’Qa’ida hands, the DOD and CIA will have a heck of a time acquiring them again. This is most likely why the Benghazi weapons running operation was shut down.
The question to ask in these things is always, who benefits? Then ask, who was capable? If indeed this was an operation to smuggle Libyan arms to the Syrian rebels, the obvious beneficiary of an attack shutting down the operation that also has the capability is Syria’s ally and sponsor, Iran. Iran and Al Qaeda are nominal opponents, but have communicated and cooperated many times in the past when both benefit.
Then again, if the reports are true that the Benghazi CIA station was holding prisoner a couple of local Libyan militiamen, perhaps they simply annoyed a local militia too much. Never assume conspiracy when stupidity is enough to explain the facts.
AL QAEDA TARGETED STEVENS BECAUSE IT BENEFITED IRAN.
Reza Khalili has said that the al Qaeda attack on the US mission in Benghazi was a false flag operation. That is, Iran was behind the attack but wanted al Qaeda to take the credit (and blame). Stevens was supplying arms and jihadis to Syria through Turkey and Iran wanted this to stop.
Larry Johnson of No Quarter, at first, went along with this theory, then poo-pooed it based on his own intel.
It seems to me that Iran is perfectly capable of infiltrating an al Qaeda/Libyan militia with the end-result that even the militia didn’t know it was being manipulated by Iranian agents/Iranian money.
According to Paula Broadwell, the CIA annex was a prison, holding Libyan militia. I’ve read elsewhere that it was a weapons warehouse. In either case, al Qaeda wanted what was in the annex.
Uh.. arms for NO hostages. Hey, wait a minute.
As I have speculated over at my log, we need to look into the possibility that the Syrians and/or Iranians were behind the attack on the Benghazi facility as pay back for us “walking guns” to Syria.
What if Ambassador Stevens was simply collateral damage during a prisoner rescue attempt by the militia?
(I don’t like Obama, but his behavior around this is so bizarre that I can think of only one explanation; the CIA and Department of State was lying to him about the situation in Libya. He really didn’t know what was happening. But, he can’t say that because that would mean that both organizations went rogue and that he lost command and control of two of the most important organizations in the executive branch. Worse, if the military was given orders outside the chain of command [to stand down] the implications are horrifying.
Do remember that the CIA, especially, and the Department of State, to a lesser degree, have a long history of lying to the President, Congress, the Press and the American People.)
Joe — Stevens was attacked in the mission, not the CIA annex. The annex had the militia prison, if we are to believe Broadwell. There is no doubt the Libyan militia knew which was what.
You are on the right track, now you need to zero in on the subject matter.
Syria was part of a broader spectrum of what appears to be Obama administration clandestine operations (wars) which were put in play to bring about Sunni domination of the Middle East.
The battle in the Middle East right now is over Russian backed Shia and US backed Sunni. The US created the conditions on the ground necessary for revolution in many of the countries starting with Egypt, then Libya and now Syria. It was always the plan of the Obama administration to use soviet style active measures to turn the Middle East into a Sunni, Socialist United Arab States. The two toughest countries to overthrow in this Obama Administration military/CIA covert campaign, were always going to be Syria and Iran, due to their solid Russian backing. Petraeus was selected to lead this activity because of his vast success in Iran and Afghanistan, taking the same action. The only difference in these clandestine theaters (Egypt, Libya, Syria and others) is they could not appear as wars, they had to appear as US assistance to rebel forces waging their own war or rebellion against and established regime.
You can trace the weapons of Fast and Furious back to the start of the campaigns in Egypt. The reason for the weapons moving through Mexico is that it was mostly lawless which makes clandestine operations difficult to track. The weapons bound for Egypt fell into the wrong hands because the US use an unreliable source in Mexico. it is believed however that some of the weapons made it to Egypt and were used in the so called liberation of Egypt.
The second theatre of operations would be Libya who was chosen because of the large stockpile of weapons which the country had in its possession. These stockpiles of weapons could be used to supply further campaigns which were planed in Syria and Jordan. With these two countries defeated, the US Sunni allies, would hold on to lands on ether side of Iran, with a friendly seaport in Syria and a route through Iraq and presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan, as well as an air station in Bahrain. Russian backed Iran would now find itself surrounded by hostile forces on three sides.
The Russians aren’t stupid, they are in this game as well and noticed what was going on in the Middle East. They chose to simply allow the US to overthrow the Southern and Western areas which they would move in and subvert with Shia radical muslims while the country was in turmoil (Transitional Government). They would essentially slam the door on the Obama administration behind them, by moving their Shia radical assets into the regions of Egypt and Libya, while the US was busy fighting a war in Syria. Further they would work with Iran to secure Shia control over Iraq, while the Americans were busy elsewhere.
Benghazi was a CIA-Department of State-DOD covert operation to broker weapons via Turkey to the Syrians. There is an executive order by Mr Obama known as an intelligence finding, which was written in August of 2012 (on the first if memory serves me correct), which allowed for the US departments (all necessary) to back the war in Syria with the focus of ousting or eliminating Assad. The heavy air support given Assad by Russia was making it impossible for rebel forces to take control of the country.
Unlike Libya, there was not a no-fly zone established over Syria. The Syrian rebels had extreme trouble with Assad’s Russian backed, air power. The only solution would have been to provide the Syrian Rebels with advanced weapons which could tip the scales of Assad’s air power. The only ground weapon with this capability would be MANPADS, both Russian made (from Libya) and US made (stingers). The danger related to supplying Syrian rebels with MANPADS was, intelligence reports from Syria had already indicated that Al-Qa’ida was fighting along side the rebels. This was reported by Reuters and the Guardian back in the Summer of 2012.
Understand that with Al-Qa’ida mixed in with the Syrian rebels, it could be extremely dangerous if MANPADS of any kind were to fall into their hands. Al’Qa’ida would seize the opportunity to acquire these weapons (MANPADS) and would use them against western targets, namely civilian airliners. Civilian airliners have no defense against MANPADS, not even the older SA7 types. This has been a concern for quite some time and its the reason President Bush supported an initiative to eliminate these MANPADS from countries who were stockpiling these weapons systems. Its almost certain that the covert weapons supplies of the CIA, which occurred in Bengahzi, resulted in MANPADS getting into the hands of Al-Qa’ida in the Syrian theatre of operations. Americans discovering this truth is most likely why American assets in Benghazi were left to fend for themselves. Its important to note the last diplomat to visit with Ambassador Stephens was the representative from Turkey who was moving the weapons supplies to Syrian Rebels. We know some of the US stingers made it to Syria, because there was a video on youtube of a Russian made helicopter being shot down by a US stinger. We know some of the Libyan MANPADs made it into Syria because Ms. Nuland of the Department of State, confirmed that in a daily briefing.
Its most likely the case that the Russians were wise to the events in Benghazi, Turkey and Syria. They most likely moved Al-Qa’ida into place to intercept the majority of MANPADS which were bound for the Syrian Rebels. Its also likely the used their Iranian backed, Al-Qa’ida forces to attack the compound in Benghazi. Not wanting the Americans to discover Benghazi’s original purpose, the order was given to “Stand Down”. US Assets on the ground in Benghazi, were basically on their own at that point.
Immediately after the American elections ended, All of those most likely involved in the clandestine wars in the Middle East have confirmed they are exiting the stage. This list includes Petraeus (CIA), Clinton (Department of State), Panetta (DOD) these three planned the clandestine wars in the Middle East; Geitner (Treasury – probably non congressional approved funding, via funds held from other countries), and Holder (most likely Weapons running operations, and obstruction and or destruction of investigative, legal documents).
In the end some non-senior level operators will be held responsible for all the events which took place related to Benghazi, just as they were related to Fast and Furious. There will be several smoke screens given to throw the media in all types of directions (ie the rouse about Petraeus and a girl friend). Mr Obama will use the fiscal cliff to throw the media off scent related to Benghazi and his clandestine wars in the Middle East, which costs America hundreds of billions of dollars and wound up a failure. The Syrian liberation army will fall apart and the entire Middle East will fall to the Russian/Iranian dominated Shia.
What is not being mentioned is the progress of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, its feared that Iran acquired nuclear weapons capability while Mr Obama was undergoing his clandestine wars in the Middle East. If This true, it would be a game changer in the Middle East and the world. Islamic Extremists with nuclear weapons capability will pose a massive threat to the West, because unlike the US and Russia, Iran will have no problem using those nuclear weapons against Western targets.
Further, if Al’Qa’ida has in their possession MANPADS, which were bound for rebel forces in Syria, they could use those MANPADS against Western civilian airliners. What better time for terrorist to strike Western targets than the Christmas holiday season in 2012. Further, remember the Mayan calendar ends on the 21st of December 2012, this is feared by many to be the end of the world, and if there is a large Terrorist cell attack of Civilian airliners, it just might appear that way.
J. Sikes@28,
Are you postulating that F&F was just a practice run of a few thousand weapons, ultimately destined for some faction in the MENA?
Otherwise, I appreciate your report on Benghazi and find the “false flag” attack as a credible reason for the op against the rented villa (not consulate) and the CIA annex.
The Administration could hardly announce just months prior to an election that a foreign power had poked out our eyes in a direct act of war.
Benghazi is a sordid tale of treason and a first rate deception, and that is why it has been so difficult to figure out. Everyone knows that the Ambassador was involved in providing weapons to the Syrian “rebels”, which is a branch of Al Qaeda, and the one thing they cannot answer is why Al Qaeda killed him. There were two agendas taking place in Benghazi, one by Stevens/CIA providing arms to Al Qaeda, and another, far more devious. Obama wanted those weapons routed to Gaza where they would be used against Israel and paid for with the vast sums of money we give to Hamas. Stevens was killed so this could be enacted. The details are in this link and at the end of it there is a link to a whole compilation of data on the topic. http://www.freedomrings1776.com/2012/11/benghazi-and-gunrunningthe-gaza.html#more
Granted there’s much shadiness surrounding this series of events. . .but I strongly suspect that Stevens was attacked because he was a conveniently available, soft target.
Remember, there had been prior incidents at the consulate, including breaches in the wall. These did not result in substantial extra protection for this American outpost. This would have been apparent to such elements of Al Qaeda as were operating in the area, and would have made an attack on the consulate almost inevitable.
I’m not sure one really needs to dig any further than that.
The truth is that Chris Stevens was Moammar Gadhafi homosexual lover and he was wasn’t murdered, rather he faked the attack to make his suicide in sorrow over Gadhafi’s death to make Fox News look bad. It’s just as credible as the paranoid fantasies being spun in this post.