Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Libya crisis: Benghazi

[MinutemanCO]

Why do I get the feeling that despite the incredible magnitude of mounting evidence, whistleblower accounts, documented timelines, testimony of those involved, that Benghazi will continue to burn out like the wick from an old candle?

[American Patriot]

The left is sorely HOPING this is the case... that all of these scandals will "simply go away".

That is the modus operandi of these people.

[vector7]

Why Was A Sunday Times Report On US Government Ties To Al-Qaeda Chief Spiked?

May 20, 2013
By Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed


Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds

The government has denied the allegations yet gone to extraordinary lengths to silence her. Her critics have derided her as a fabulist and fabricator. But now comes word that some of her most serious allegations were confirmed by a major European newspaper only to be squashed at the request of the U.S. government.

In a recent book Classified Woman, Sibel Edmonds, a former translator for the FBI, describes how the Pentagon, CIA and State Department maintained intimate ties to al-Qaeda militants as late as 2001. Her memoir, Classified Woman: The Sibel Edmonds Story, published last year, charged senior government officials with negligence, corruption and collaboration with al Qaeda in illegal arms smuggling and drugs trafficking in Central Asia.

In interviews with this author in early March, Edmonds claimed that Ayman al-Zawahiri, current head of al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden’s deputy at the time, had innumerable, regular meetings at the U.S. embassy in Baku, Azerbaijan, with U.S. military and intelligence officials between 1997 and 2001, as part of an operation known as ‘Gladio B’. Al-Zawahiri, she charged, as well as various members of the bin Laden family and other mujahideen, were transported on NATO planes to various parts of Central Asia and the Balkans to participate in Pentagon-backed destabilisation operations.

According to two Sunday Times journalists speaking on condition of anonymity, this and related revelations had been confirmed by senior Pentagon and MI6 officials as part of a four-part investigative series that were supposed to run in 2008. The Sunday Times journalists described how the story was inexplicably dropped under the pressure of undisclosed “interest groups”, which, they suggest, were associated with the U.S. State Department.

Shooting the Messenger

Described by the American Civil Liberties Union as the “most gagged person in the history of the United States of America,” Edmonds studied criminal justice, psychology and public policy at George Washington and George Mason universities. Two weeks after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, her fluency in Turkish, Farsi and Azerbaijani earned her an FBI contract at the Washington DC field office. She was tasked with translating highly classified intelligence from operations against terrorism suspects in and outside the U.S.

In the course of her work, Edmonds became privy to evidence that U.S. military and intelligence agencies were collaborating with Islamist militants affiliated with al-Qaeda, the very forces blamed for the 9/11 attacks – and that officials in the FBI were covering up the evidence. When Edmonds complained to her superiors, her family was threatened by one of the subjects of her complaint, and she was fired. Her accusations of espionage against her FBI colleagues were eventually investigated by the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General, which did not give details about the allegations as they remained classified.

Although no final conclusions about the espionage allegations were reached, the Justice Department concluded that many of Edmonds’ accusations “were supported, that the FBI did not take them seriously enough and that her allegations were, in fact, the most significant factor in the FBI’s decision to terminate her services.”

When she attempted to go public with her story in 2002, and again in 2004, the U.S. government silenced Edmonds by invoking a legal precedent known as “state secrets privilege” – a near limitless power to quash a lawsuit based solely on the government’s claim that evidence or testimony could divulge information that might undermine “national security.” Under this doctrine, the government sought to retroactively classify basic information concerning Edmonds’s case already in the public record, including, according to the New York Times, “what languages Ms. Edmonds translated, what types of cases she handled, and what employees she worked with, officials said. Even routine and widely disseminated information — like where she worked — is now classified.”

Although certainly not the first invocation of “state secrets privilege”, since the Edmonds case the precedent has been used repeatedly in the post-9/11 era under both the Bush and Obama administrations to shield the U.S. government from court scrutiny of rendition, torture, warrantless wiretapping, as well as the President’s claimed war powers.

Other intelligence experts agree that Edmonds had stumbled upon a criminal conspiracy at the heart of the American judicial system. In her memoirs, she recounts that FBI Special Agent Gilbert Graham, who also worked in the Washington field office on counter-intelligence operations, told her over a coffee how he “ran background checks on federal judges” in the “early nineties for the bureau… If we came up with shit – skeletons in their closets – the Justice Department kept it in their pantry to be used against them in the future or to get them to do what they want in certain cases – cases like yours.”A redacted version of Graham’s classified protected disclosure to the Justice Department regarding these allegations, released in 2007, refers to the FBI’s “abuse of authority” by conducting illegal wiretapping to obtain information on U.S. public officials.

Incubating Terror

Five years ago, Edmonds revealed to the Sunday Times that an unidentified senior U.S. State Department official was on the payroll of Turkish agents in Washington, passing on nuclear and military secrets. “He was aiding foreign operatives against U.S. interests by passing them highly classified information, not only from the State Department but also from the Pentagon, in exchange for money, position and political objectives”, Edmonds told the paper. She reported coming across this information when listening to suppressed phone calls recorded by FBI surveillance, marked by her colleague Melek Can Dickerson as “not pertinent”.

In the Sunday Times exposé, Edmonds described a parallel organization in Israel cooperating with the Turks on illegal weapons sales and technology transfers. Between them, Israel and Turkey operated a range of front companies incorporated in the U.S. with active “moles in sensitive military and nuclear institutions”, supported by U.S. officials, in order to sell secrets to the highest bidder. One of the buyers was Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) – which often used its Turkish allies, according to the Times, “as a conduit… because they were less likely to attract suspicion.”

The Pakistani operation was, the paper reported, “led by General Mahmoud Ahmad, then the ISI chief” from 1999 to 2001, when the agency helped train, supply and coordinate the Afghan Taliban and gave sanctuary to their Arab allies brought together in the coalition named al-Qaeda. Ahmad, as the Times noted, “was accused [by the FBI] of sanctioning a $100,000 wire payment to Mohammed Atta, one of the 9/11 hijackers, immediately before the attacks.”

According to Indian intelligence officials, they had assisted the FBI in “tracing and establishing” the financial trail between the General and the chief hijacker. The discovery was, they allege, the real reason behind the General’s sudden retirement in October 2001. The Pakistani daily, The News, reported on 10th September 2001 that the ISI chief held several “mysterious meetings at the Pentagon and National Security Council” that week, including with CIA director George Tenet.

In an interview with this author in March, Edmonds raised the question of whether U.S. officials’ liaisons with an espionage network overseen by Ahmad, and the FBI’s suppression of related intelligence, played a role in facilitating the attacks.

“Following 9/11, a number of the foreign operatives were taken in for questioning by the FBI on suspicion that they knew about or somehow aided the attacks”, reported the Sunday Times. The paper related that according to Edmonds, the senior State Department official received a call from a foreign agent under FBI surveillance asking for help to “get them out of the U.S. because we can’t afford for them to spill the beans.” The official promised “he would ‘take care of it’.”

Edmonds told this author that high-level corruption compromised the ability of the U.S. intelligence community to pursue ongoing investigations of those planning the 9/11 attacks. “It was precisely those militants that were incubated by some of America’s key allies”, she said. Corruption helped guarantee Congressional silence when that incubation strategy backfired in the form of 9/11. “Both Republican and Democratic representatives in the House and Senate came up in FBI counterintelligence investigations for taking bribes from foreign agents”, she said.

Al-Qaeda: Enemy or Asset?

In her interview, Edmonds insisted that after its initial exposé, the Times‘ investigation had gone beyond such previous revelations, and was preparing to disclose her most startling accusations. Among these, Edmonds described how the CIA and the Pentagon had been running a series of covert operations supporting Islamist militant networks linked to Osama bin Laden right up to 9/11, in Central Asia, the Balkans and the Caucasus.

While it is widely recognised that the CIA sponsored bin Laden’s networks in Afghanistan during the Cold War, U.S. government officials deny any such ties existed. Others claim these ties were real, but were severed after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1989.

But according to Edmonds, this narrative is false. “Not just bin Laden, but several senior ‘bin Ladens’ were transported by U.S. intelligence back and forth to the region in the late 1990s through to 2001″, she told this author, “including Ayman al-Zawahiri” – Osama bin Laden’s right-hand-man who has taken over as al-Qaeda’s top leader.

“In the late 1990s, all the way up to 9/11, al-Zawahiri and other mujahideen operatives were meeting regularly with senior U.S. officials in the U.S. embassy in Baku to plan the Pentagon’s Balkan operations with the mujahideen,” said Edmonds. “We had support for these operations from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, but the U.S. oversaw and directed them. They were being run from a secret section of the Pentagon with its own office”.

American-Conservative-Nov-2009-Sibel-Edmonds-Ceasefire-MagazineEdmonds clarified, “the FBI counterintelligence investigation which was tracking these targets, along with their links to U.S. officials, was known as ‘Gladio B’, and was kickstarted in 1997. It so happens that Major Douglas Dickerson” – the husband of her FBI co-worker Melek whom she accused of espionage – “specifically directed the Pentagon’s ‘Gladio’ operations in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan at this time.”

In testimony under oath, Edmonds has previously confirmed that Major Doug Dickerson worked for the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) under the weapons procurement logistics division on Turkey and Central Asia, and with the Office of Special Plans (OSP) overseeing policy in Central Asia.

Gladio B

Edmonds said that the Pentagon operations with Islamists were an “extension” of an original ‘Gladio’ programme uncovered in the 1970s in Italy, part of an EU-wide NATO covert operation that began as early as the 1940s. As Swiss historian Dr. Daniele Ganser records in his seminal book, NATO’s Secret Armies, an official Italian parliamentary inquiry confirmed that British MI6 and the CIA had established a network of secret “stay-behind” paramilitary armies, staffed by fascist and Nazi collaborators. The covert armies carried out terrorist attacks throughout Western Europe, officially blamed on Communists in what Italian military intelligence called the ‘strategy of tension’.

“You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game” explained Gladio operative Vincenzo Vinciguerra during his trial in 1984. “The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people… to turn to the State to ask for greater security.”

While the reality of Gladio’s existence in Europe is a matter of historical record, Edmonds contended the same strategy was adopted by the Pentagon in the 1990s in a new theatre of operations, namely, Asia. “Instead of using neo-Nazis, they used mujahideen working under various bin Ladens, as well as al-Zawahiri”, she said.

The last publicly known Gladio meeting occurred in NATO’s Allied Clandestine Committee (ACC) in Brussels in 1990. While Italy was a focal point for the older European operations, Edmonds said that Turkey and Azerbaijan served as the main conduits for a completely new, different set of operations in Asia using veterans of the anti-Soviet campaign in Afghanistan, the so-called “Afghan Arabs” that had been trained by al-Qaeda.

These new Pentagon-led operations were codenamed ‘Gladio B’ by FBI counterintelligence: “In 1997, NATO asked [Egyptian President] Hosni Mubarak to release from prison Islamist militants affiliated to Ayman al-Zawahiri [whose role in the assassination of Anwar Sadat led to Mubarak’s ascension]. They were flown under U.S. orders to Turkey for [training and use in] operations by the Pentagon”, she said.

Edmonds’ allegations find some independent corroboration in the public record. The Wall Street Journal refers to a nebulous agreement between Mubarak and “the operational wing of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, which was then headed by Ayman al-Zawahiri… Many of that group’s fighters embraced a cease-fire with the government of former President Hosni Mubarak in 1997.”

Youssef Bodansky, former Director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, cited U.S. intelligence sources in an article for Defense and Foreign Affairs: Strategic Policy, confirming “discussions between the Egyptian terrorist leader Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri and an Arab-American known to have been both an emissary of the CIA and the U.S. Government.” He referred to an “offer” made to al-Zawahiri in November 1997 on behalf of U.S. intelligence, granting his Islamists a free hand in Egypt as long as they lent support to U.S. forces in the Balkans. In 1998, Al Zawahiri’s brother, Muhammed, led an elite unit of the Kosovo Liberation Army against Serbs during the Kosovo conflict – he reportedly had direct contact with NATO leadership.

“This is why”, Edmonds continued in her interview, “even though the FBI routinely monitored the communications of the diplomatic arms of all countries, only four countries were exempt from this protocol – the UK, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Belgium – the seat of NATO. No other country – not even allies like Israel or Saudi Arabia, were exempt. This is because these four countries were integral to the Pentagon’s so-called Gladio B operations.”

Edmonds did not speculate on the objectives of the Pentagon’s ‘Gladio B’ operations, but highlighted the following possibilities: projecting U.S. power in the former Soviet sphere of influence to access previously untapped strategic energy and mineral reserves for U.S. and European companies; pushing back Russian and Chinese power; and expanding the scope of lucrative criminal activities, particularly illegal arms and drugs trafficking.

Terrorism finance expert Loretta Napoleoni estimates the total value of this criminal economy to be about $1.5 trillion annually, the bulk of which “flows into Western economies, where it gets recycled in the U.S. and in Europe” as a “vital element of the cash flow of these economies.”

It is no coincidence then that the opium trade, Edmonds told this author, has grown rapidly under the tutelage of NATO in Afghanistan: “I know for a fact that NATO planes routinely shipped heroin to Belgium, where they then made their way into Europe and to the UK. They also shipped heroin to distribution centres in Chicago and New Jersey. FBI counterintelligence and DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) operations had acquired evidence of this drug trafficking in its surveillance of a wide range of targets, including senior officials in the Pentagon, CIA and State Department. As part of this surveillance, the role of the Dickersons – with the support of these senior U.S. officials – in facilitating drug-trafficking, came up. It was clear from this evidence that the whole funnel of drugs, money and terror in Central Asia was directed by these officials.”

The evidence for this funnel, according to Edmonds, remains classified in the form of FBI counterintelligence surveillance records she was asked to translate. Although this alleged evidence has never made it to court due to the U.S. government’s exertion of ‘state secret privilege’, she was able to testify in detail concerning her allegations, including naming names, in 2009.

Censorship

In recent interviews, two Sunday Times journalists confirmed to this author that the newspaper’s investigation based on Sibel Edmonds’ revelations was to break much of the details into the open.

“We’d spoken to several current and active Pentagon officials confirming the existence of U.S. operations sponsoring mujahideen networks in Central Asia from the 1990s to 2001,” said one Sunday Times source. “Those mujahideen networks were intertwined with a whole range of criminal enterprises, including drugs and guns. The Pentagon officials corroborated Edmonds’ allegations against specific U.S. officials, and I’d also interviewed an MI6 officer who confirmed that the U.S. was running these operations sponsoring mujahideen in that period.”

But according to Edmonds, citing the investigative team at the paper, the last two articles in the series were spiked under U.S. State Department pressure. She recalled being told at the time by journalists leading the Sunday Times investigation that the newspaper’s editor had decided to squash the story after receiving calls from officials at the U.S. embassy in London.

A journalist with the Sunday Times‘ investigative unit told this author he had interviewed former Special Agent in Charge, Dennis Saccher, who had moved to the FBI’s Colorado office. Saccher reportedly confirmed the veracity of Edmonds’ allegations of espionage, telling him that Edmonds’ story “should have been front page news” because it was “a scandal bigger than Watergate.” The same journalist confirmed that after interviewing Saccher at his home, the newspaper was contacted by the U.S. State Department. “The U.S. embassy in London called the editor and tried to ward him off. We were told that we weren’t permitted to approach Saccher or any other active FBI agents directly, but could only go through the FBI’s press office – that if we tried to speak to Saccher or anyone else employed by the FBI directly, that would be illegal. Of course, it isn’t, but that’s what we were told. I think this was a veiled threat.”

Saccher’s comments to the journalist never made it to press.

A lead reporter on the series at the Sunday Times told this author that the investigation based on Edmonds’ information was supposed to have four parts, but was inexplicably dropped. “The story was pulled half-way, suddenly, without any warning”, the journalist said. “I wasn’t party to the editorial decision to drop the story, but there was a belief in the office amongst several journalists who were part of the Insight investigative unit that the decision was made under pressure from the U.S. State Department, because the story might cause a diplomatic incident.”

Although the journalist was unaware of where this belief came from – and was not informed of the U.S. embassy’s contact with the paper’s editor which the other journalist was privy to – he acknowledged that self-censorship influenced by unspecified “interest groups” was a possible explanation. “The way the story was dropped was unusual, but the belief amongst my colleagues this happened under political pressure is plausible.” He cryptically described an “editorial mechanism, linked to the paper but not formally part of it, which could however exert control on stories when necessary, linked to certain interests.” When asked which interests, the journalist said, “I can’t say. I can’t talk about that.”

Edmonds described how, due to the U.S. government’s efforts to silence her, she had no option left except to write her story down. The resultant book, Classified Woman, had to be submitted to an FBI panel for review. By law, the bureau was required to make a decision on what could be disclosed or redacted within 30 days.

Instead, about a year later, Edmonds’ lawyer received a letter from the FBI informing them that the agency was still reviewing the book, and prohibiting her from publishing it: “The matters Ms. Edmonds writes about involve many equities, some of which may implicate information that is classified.

Approval of the manuscripts by the FBI will include incorporation of all changes required by the FBI. Until then, Ms. Edmonds does not have approval to publish her manuscripts which includes showing them to editors, literary agents, publishers, reviewers, or anyone else. At this point, Ms. Edmonds remains obligated not to disclose or publish the manuscript in any manner.”

The block was another example, Edmonds said, “of the abuse of ‘national security’ to conceal evidence of criminality.” She said that this forced her to release the book herself in March 2012, as no publisher would risk taking it on.

[vector7]

Report: More Benghazi Whistleblowers to Reveal ‘Devastating’ Details About Attack, Including WHY Chris Stevens Was in Libya

May. 21, 2013 5:00pm Jason Howerton


Amb. Chris Stevens (Photo Credit: AP)

New Benghazi whistleblowers are prepared to reveal shocking details about the Sept. 11 terror attack, including why U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens was in Libya to begin with, two former U.S. diplomats reportedly told PJ Media on Monday.

The unidentified whistleblowers are reportedly colleagues of former diplomats and are seeking legal counsel because they “work in areas not fully protected by whistleblower law,” the report adds.

More from PJ Media’s exclusive:

According to the diplomats, what these whistleblowers will say will be at least as explosive as what we have already learned about the scandal, including details about what really transpired in Benghazi that are potentially devastating to both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

The former diplomats inform PJM the new revelations concentrate in two areas — what Ambassador Chris Stevens was actually doing in Benghazi and the pressure put on General Carter Ham, then in command of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) and therefore responsible for Libya, not to act to protect jeopardized U.S. personnel.

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.”

One of the most important unanswered questions about the Benghazi attack has been why Stevens was in Benghazi on the anniversary of the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. If the whistleblowers’ information turns out to be credible, it could be a huge break in the investigation into what really happened.

According to PJ Media’s report, Clinton’s plan to reaquire the stinger missiles left Stevens with the responsibility to handle the aftermath of the alleged gun-running operation after it was clear that the “insurgents” in Libya were really radical Islamists aligned with al-Qaeda.

The former diplomat who reportedly talked exclusively with PJ Media, likened the Obama administration’s plan in Libya to the amateurish covert war depicted in the Mike Nochols film, “Charlie Wilson’s War.” The movie tells the story of an arrogant Texas congressman, Charlie Wilson, who supplies Stinger missiles to the Afghan guerillas to help them fight the Soviets.

“It’s as if Hillary and the others just watched that movie and said ‘Hey, let’s do that!’” the diplomat reportedly said.
Here’s the trailer for Charlie Wilson’s War” for context:



“He added that he and his colleagues think the leaking of General David Petraeus’ affair with his biographer Paula Broadwell was timed to silence the former CIA chief on these matters,” PJ Media reports.

It is unclear at this point if the unidentified “whisteblowers” are credible, however, TheBlaze will continue monitoring this developing story.

“PJ Media recognizes this is largely hearsay, but the two diplomats sounded quite credible. One of them was in a position of responsibility in a dangerous area of Iraq in 2004,” PJM’s report concludes.

Benghazi is Not about Gun Running, It’s about the Money


by John Galt
May 22, 2013 05:00 ET


Over the last six plus months, I have penned two articles about the Assassination of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and “The Other Truth about Benghazi,” both of which were fairly simple to understand when one realizes the level of corruption and financial incest occurring inside the nation’s capitol. To this day not one national talk show host nor political animal has asked the most important question remaining in the investigation which will topple the regime in D.C.


Last week The National, a newspaper out of the United Arab Emirates published a fascinating article which drove the point home about what is happening in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Syria:


Saudis overtaking Qatar in sponsoring Syrian rebels



In the article by Hassan Hassan it was stated:

Last week, a 12-member delegation from the Syrian opposition visited Saudi Arabia, for an unprecedented two-day official meeting.

Saudi authorities had consistently declined to meet the opposition, despite repeated requests. This was partly because the kingdom has opposed Muslim Brotherhood dominance in the Syrian National Council and then the National Coalition, owing to the Brotherhood’s alliance with Qatar and Turkey and opposition to inclusivity.

But last week, surprisingly, the Saudi foreign minister, Saud Al Faisal, met Syrian Brotherhood deputy leader Mahmoud Farouq Tayfour, in one-to-one talks.

The Brotherhood had previously been confident in its alliance with Qatar and Turkey, and saw no need to offer concessions to engage other countries, including Saudi Arabia. So this meeting, which came after an “eager appeal” from the Brotherhood, suggests a shift in regional dynamics.

Two separate sources close to the opposition say Mr Tayfour assured the Saudi minister that “Syria’s Brotherhood will definitely not be like Egypt’s Brotherhood”.

He also “harshly” criticised Qatar’s role, even though Qatar had helped revive the Brotherhood in Syria after the Baathists massacred it out of existence in 1982.
Still, this meeting does not mean there has been a breakthrough in the kingdom’s relationship with the Brotherhood, which in 2004 then-Crown Prince Nayef bin Abdulaziz (who died last June) called the “source of all problems”.

The meeting was meant to build channels of communication with the coalition as Riyadh apparently took over sponsorship of the opposition from Doha. Last week Al Arab newspaper, citing opposition sources, said Doha had told the coalition’s secretary general, Mustafa Al Sabbagh, that “the Syrian dossier is now in the hands of Saudi Arabia”.

What was conveniently left out was the fact that Qatar was actively arming the rebels just as they did in Libya and had allegedly spent over $3 billion to aid the opposition in Syria according to an article in the Financial Times. The interesting part of the story by Roula Khalaf and Abigail Fielding Smith was this one paragraph:

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, which tracks arms transfers, Qatar has sent the most weapons deliveries to Syria, with more than 70 military cargo flights into neighbouring Turkey between April 2012 and March this year.

The only supplier of arms which match the Soviet style in question is in fact those seized by United States forces after Gaddafi’s collapse then transferred to Libya. Apparently the U.S. wants to keep this supply line source quiet so as not to upset the Chinese and Russians but also to prevent any appearance of wrong doing by the Obama administration. These two stories plus older stories from The Blaze and other sources point to the only question remaining to solve the Benghazi scandal mystery:


Where’s the money?



If Qatar and Saudi Arabia are willing to spend north of $3 billion to overthrow the regime in Syria, then if the United States received the cash for those Libyan weapons, as it appears they have, who received the money, where is an accounting for it, and did any of it accidentally “slosh” into someone’s campaign re-election efforts via the numerous PACs and other support mechanisms?

"I've always wondered

[American Patriot]

Oh boy, I bet people start turning up "dead" from "suicide". Vince Fostered....

[vector7]

Krauthammer: Obama Was Crafting 'Cover Story' Before Benghazi Victims Were Dead




Charles Krauthammer "I think there is a bigger story here that will in time come out. The biggest scandal of all, the biggest question is what was the president doing in those eight hours. He had a routine meeting at five o’clock.

He never after during the eight hours when our guys have their lives in danger, he never called the Secretary of Defense, he never calls the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, he never called the CIA Director, Who does he call? But five hours in he calls the Secretary of State.

And after the phone call she releases a statement essentially about the video and how we denounce any intolerance. It looks as if the only phone call is to construct a cover story at a time when the last two Americans who died were still alive and fighting for their lives. There’s the scandal and that has to be uncovered.”

[American Patriot]

"Craft a cover story... do whatever you can to make sure there's not blow back on the Muslims. In fact, turn this around somehow on the anti-Muslims. We have to control the damage...."


God

[vector7]

Hillary Clinton Denies Knowledge of State Department Scandals, Cover-Ups



by Kristinn Taylor 12 Jun 2013

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a statement through a spokesman Tuesday that claimed total ignorance of rampant sex crimes and cover-ups occurring on her watch that were alleged in an Inspector General’s memo reported by CBS News and the New York Post.

The IG memo, dated October 23, 2012, contains shocking allegations of overseas criminal conduct by State Department officials including sexual assault , ‘endemic’ procurement of prostitutes (including children), and drugs—all of which were alleged to have been covered-up by various officials at the highest levels of the State Department including Clinton’s chief of staff Cheryl Mills.

CNN reported Clinton spokesman Nicholas Merrill issued a written statement saying, "We learned of it from the media and don't know anything beyond what's been reported."

Clinton would have the American people believe that she was completely out of touch about the lawlessness at her department during her four year tenure as Secretary of State.

For her statement to be true, Clinton would have to not know that members of her protective detail were disciplined and reassigned away from her for having sex with prostitutes in hotels she stayed at in foreign countries including Russia and Colombia; that a 2008 bundler to the Obama campaign appointed ambassador to Belgium was brought home for questioning about allegations by his security detail that he repeatedly ditched them to have sex with underage prostitutes in a Brussels park known for boy prostitutes; that a security official was accused of sexually assaulting foreigners hired as guards in as many as four nations; that her chief of staff squelched an investigation of a nominee to be ambassador to Iraq; that a drug ring supplied State Department security contractors in Baghdad and that the State Department involved shooting deaths of four Hondurans, including two pregnant women, was blocked by a high ranking State Department official. (This new scandal from the IG memo was reported Wednesday by the New York Post.)
Howard Gutman, the U.S. Ambassador to Belgium named by the Post as the ambassador accused in the IG memo of picking up underage prostitutes, issued a statement Tuesday vehemently denying the allegations:

"I am angered and saddened by the baseless allegations that have appeared in the press and to watch the four years I have proudly served in Belgium smeared is devastating. I live on a beautiful park in Brussels that you walk through to get to many locations and at no point have I ever engaged in any improper activity."

CNN reported Gutman claimed to his bosses at Foggy Bottom he frequented the park to get away from his wife.

The ambassador went to Washington and was asked what he was doing and he denied any wrongdoing, the source told CNN. The ambassador explained that sometimes he fights with his wife, needs air and he goes for a walk in the park because he likes it.

The Atlantic reported that the park Gutman trolled, Parc Royal Warandepark, was well-known as a place to pick up adult homosexual and adolescent boy prostitutes.

Gutman probably could have stopped after the first sentence of his statement. His neighborhood park is Brussels's Parc Royal Warandepark, where some of the alleged solicitations and ditching of security took place, as the New York Daily News reported. He isn't exactly wrong about it being nice, either — the royal park is bordered by the BOZAR museum and Parliament.

Picturesque as the digs may be, according to a local report from 2010, the park is rumored to be a site of frequent homosexual and underage prostitution. And in 2009, RTL reported on prostitution arrests involving young boys and a policeman.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki repeatedly refused to clear Gutman of the allegations in the IG memo when badgered by reporters, who suggested Gutman retaining his post indicated his exoneration. Psaki even refused to state that Clinton’s successor John F. Kerry has confidence in Gutman.

QUESTION: First, has Secretary Kerry spoken to the Ambassador?

MS. PSAKI: Not that I’m aware of.

QUESTION: Does the Secretary have full faith and confidence in this Ambassador?

MS. PSAKI: Well, the Secretary is proud to lead, of course, a Department of 70,000 dedicated men and women serving. He takes every accusation seriously, as we all do. And I can assure you, as I just said, that in any case, if there were documented evidence and action was needed to be taken, he would be taking that action.

QUESTION: So you’re declining this opportunity to say, on behalf of the Secretary, that he has full confidence in this Ambassador?

MS. PSAKI: I’m just seeing through the process, James.

The Hill reported that Rep. Ed Royce, Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Relations, sent a letter to Sec. Kerry demanding answers on the scandal by June 25.

[American Patriot]

"Stop BOTHERING me or I'll HOLD MY BREATH!!!!!!"

(Oh, please, Hillary, hold it..... for 10 minutes!)

[American Patriot]

Admiral Says Obama Conspired To Stage Benghazi

21 Friday Jun 2013
Posted by Gary Oldman in False Flag Operation, Government, Middle East, U.S. News
≈ 1 Comment

Tags
Admiral James Lyons, al-qaeda, ambassador Chris Stevens, America, American ambassador, benghazi, Benghazi Scandal, Benghazi-Gate, consulate, fake terror, false flag, Glen Doherty, jihadists, Libya, Middle East, Obama, Obama administration, October Surprise, Omar Abdel Rahman, staged terror, terrorists, Tyrone Woods, United States, usa

A retired four-star admiral is now claiming that Barack Obama intentionally conspired with America’s enemies to stage a bogus attack and the kidnapping of an American ambassador so he could “negotiate” the release of a “hostage” and bolster his mediocre approval ratings just prior to the election!
The Washington Examiner, quoting retired Four-Star Admiral James Lyons, writes: “the attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi… was the result of a bungled abduction attempt…. the first stage of an international prisoner exchange… that would have ensured the release of Omar Abdel Rahman, the ‘Blind Sheik’…”
But something went horribly wrong with Obama’s “October Surprise.” Although the Obama Administration intentionally gutted security at the consulate prior to the staged kidnapping, former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty disobeyed direct orders to stand down, saved American lives, single-handedly killed scores of attackers…and the attackers, believing that Obama had betrayed them, tortured Ambassador Chris Stevens and dragged his body through the streets.

[American Patriot]

Four Star Admiral Is Claiming Obama Conspired With America’s Enemies To Stage Benghazi

Breaking News | January 12, 2013 | 22 Comments

---

(Floyd And Mary Beth Brown) It’s even worse than we previously thought.


A retired four-star admiral is now claiming that Barack Obama intentionally conspired with America’s enemies to stage a bogus attack and the kidnapping of an American ambassador so he could “negotiate” the release of a “hostage” and bolster his mediocre approval ratings just prior to the election!


The Washington Examiner, quoting retired Four-Star Admiral James Lyons, writes: “the attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi… was the result of a bungled abduction attempt…. the first stage of an international prisoner exchange… that would have ensured the release of Omar Abdel Rahman, the ‘Blind Sheik’…”


But something went horribly wrong with Obama’s “October Surprise.” Although the Obama Administration intentionally gutted security at the consulate prior to the staged kidnapping, former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty disobeyed direct orders to stand down, saved American lives, single-handedly killed scores of attackers…and the attackers, believing that Obama had betrayed them, tortured Ambassador Chris Stevens and dragged his body through the streets.


Some will say that Admiral Lyons’ accusation is not a smoking gun. We agree; that’s exactly why Congress must investigate Benghazi-gate.


Moreover, we firmly believe the problem with Admiral Lyons’ assertion is that he is only scratching the surface; the full and complete truth may be much, much worse.


Benghazi-gate is not about a bogus YouTube video series of lies. It’s not about the Obama Administration’s foreign policy ineptitude. We are dealing with something much more sinister… something potentially treasonous… and the following questions, posed in an article in The New American, go to the heart of the matter:


1. ”What was the Obama administration’s full role in helping violent Jihadists, self-styled al Qaeda terrorists, and Western-backed “revolutionaries” take over Libya in the first place?


2. Did that half-baked scheme to arm Jihadist leaders, who… had previously fought U.S. troops in Iraq, contribute to the attack, as countless experts and officials have suggested?


3. What was actually going on at the compound in Benghazi, which, as the report states, was never a “consulate” despite establishment media claims?


4. Was Ambassador Stevens recruiting and arming Jihadists and terrorists to wage war on the Syrian regime after what Obama called the “success” in Libya, as a growing body of credible evidence suggests?


5. Why did the administration claim for so long that the attack was just a “protest” over a YouTube video gone awry, even when it knew definitively that was not the case?


6. Was the lack of security at the compound a political ploy to conceal the extent of the lawlessness and utter chaos left in the wake of Obama’s unconstitutional “regime change” war on Libya, as even members of Congress have alleged?”


It’s clear. Benghazi-Gate is only a small piece of a much larger operation, an attempt to conceal what The New American calls “the Obama administration’s full role in helping violent Jihadists and self-styled al Qaeda terrorists.”


Prior to the election Barack Obama continually told us that “Osama bin-Laden is dead and GM is alive”; but the sad truth is that Osama bin-Laden’s organization is alive and well, and the Obama Regime may be giving aid and comfort to this terrorist network.


And prior to the election, Fox News’ Geraldo Rivera pontificated that Republicans shouldn’t “politicize” Benghazi-gate. Swaggering onto the set of Fox and Friends, Rivera bloviated: “I think we have to stop this politicizing.” And Rivera issued the following veiled warning to Republicans: “Do we want to try and influence the election with a tragedy that happened in North Africa?”


Ironic, isn’t it? Barack Obama played politics with the lives of Americans; like Rivera, the media covered Obama’s rear and threatened to accuse anyone and everyone who mentioned it of “playing politics.”


Weak-willed Republicans apparently took Rivera’s threat to heart as Rivera also said that Republican Senators John Barrasso, James Inhofe, and Bob Corker, who all sit on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “all agree that the supercharged atmosphere around the story — prudence dictates that these hearings be postponed until” after the election.


Well, the election has come and gone. Congress now has no excuse. The American people needed the truth before the election; but now that Obama is back in the White House, real conservatives must demand answers.


The American people deserve to have those questions answered; and moreover, the American people deserve justice.

[MinutemanCO]

I wouldn't put anything past Obama, the tyranical, narcissistic sociopath. It's just freaking unconscionable, though. You can't play with people's lives like that. I'd hate to be on the receiving end when Obama's judgment comes calling.

What is with all the subordinates, though? Does everyone just go along with these inhuman schemes without question? Where are the ethics, the morality of people these days. Dust in the wind.

[American Patriot]

In talking about the subordinates, I don't know if you (or anyone here really) quite gets the "government worker mentality". To be honest and fair, I DOUBT I truly "understand it" but I can tell you it pisses me OFF to no end.

It is difficult to explain, but I'll try to put it into words.

There are GS ranks. A GS-16 is viewed as a god... or more accurately a "demi-god". Those who have SES status (Senior Executive Service) are viewed as gods.

Just a quick pull from Google... this is what Google shows when you do a search:

Senior Executive Service - Office of Personnel Management

www.opm.gov/ses/‎
The Senior Executive Service (SES) is comprised of the men and women charged with leading the continuing transformation of government.

Read that again.... "comprised of the men and women charged with leading the continuing transformation of government."


What transformation? WTF is that? I wish I could tell you precisely what it means but I don't know.

I've had GS-16s rip me a new asshole for no reason in this building not once, but three times in 16 years. And literally, there was NO REASON for them to yell at me other than they were attempting to assert some kind of power hungry egotistical authority over me because I'm a "lowly contractor".

In all three of those encounters I stood my ground and raised my voice to the same level they were using and refused to back down. In each case I told them precisely what I thought of them... that they were "Obnoxious jerks who let their alleged power go to their heads and I've worked for Presidents and been chewed out by people much better than you. I'm not scared of you, being fired or losing my job. I have a job to do, and you're in my way."

In one case the security forces very nearly arrested the man for getting in my face because they were present when he started his yelling and poking his finger in my face.

Other people who have heard of these encounters have wondered aloud how I still had my job... lol

And they also said they would never have done what I did to a GS-16.

Their point was I wasn't "showing respect" for the rank of the person. I told them I am a civilian, they don't "out rank" me, I'm not in the military any longer and unless theyshow ME respect I'm not going to show it back. In every case they were using their rank as a lever and were trying to make me do something that either wasn't in the contract or were trying to get me to do things outside of my real job (which sometimes I will do if for no other reason than to make people happy and give us a good name in the building).

Essentially though SES personnel are government workers who've been promoted to positions that are 6 figure jobs and they think with that rank comes power. They believe themselves to be above the law, above being questioned and EXPECT immediate obedience to their orders. When someone balks, they blow up.

Hopefully this explains what is going on with these subordinates. They DO NOT QUESTION THOSE OF HIGHER RANK, no matter what. This is what is WRONG with the US Government. These people are BUREAUCRATS and SHOULD GO, they continue to "exist" from administration to administration and they are the "backbone of what keeps the government big". It ain't Congress, the President or the SCOTUS, it's THESE people.

[AGEUSAF]

I concur with what Rick is saying.

[American Patriot]

I guess the point is actually moot now, but, just for clarification, Obama gave the stand down order.... on Benghazi. If true, he basically had those men killed.

Former Ambassador: Benghazi “Stand Down” Order Came from Obama .

Posted on July 31, 2013 by Steve | 1 Comment
Ann Wagner

Ho Hum, Let’s just pound our head against the wall some more.

——————— Steve —————–

Posted on July 30, 2013 http://conservativebyte.com
Was there ever any doubt?
Check it out:
Ann Wagner, a former US ambassador and current congresswoman from Missouri, was interviewed about what the protocol would be for a “stand down” order in the event of a consulate being under attack, and she answered what many have suspected already: that’s an order that would come from Obama himself.
Bama in his Tightey Whitey’s


This is one of the reasons that the Obama administration has essentially refused to provide where Obama was at or what he was doing during the attack. This is because we know exactly what he was doing — ignoring the cries for help for political reasons.
Being wrong about policy is one thing. But ignoring the screams of those who work for you because you’d rather them die
( I’m sorry, but did you get that? He would rather they DIE!!)
than accept that your foreign policy is creating more terrorists is a level of treason rare, even for the most despotic tyrants.

Here’s a summary of the important part of the interview, courtesy of Special Operations Speaks:

Congresswoman and former United States Ambassador to Luxembourg Ann Wagner (R-MO) appeared on The Dana Loesch show and placed the blame, of the stand down order to those that could have offered assistance to Americans under attack, on none other than Barack Obama.
Loesch asked Wagner, ‘Because you have been an ambassador, you have been overseas with similar responsibilities and similar missions – who gives such an order to stand down? Where does that come from?’
‘The President of the United States,’ the Missouri congresswoman affirmed.
As top diplomat in Libya Gregory Hicks testified to on Wednesday before the House Oversight Committee, ‘The Libyans that I talked to, and the Libyans and other Americans who were involved in the war have told me also, that Libyan revolutionaries were very cognizant of the impact that American and NATO airpower had with respect to their victory.’
‘They are under no illusions that American and NATO airpower won that war for them,” Hicks continued. “And so, in my personal opinion, a fast mover flying over Benghazi at some point, you know, as soon as possible might very well have prevented some of the bad things that happened that night.’

Here’s the specific line itself from the radio interview:
~Steve~ H/T http://www.capitalisminstitute.org/stand-down-orders/

[American Patriot]

Well, well, well.... These fuckers are in major coverup mode.


Well, DOZENS of CIA agents were on the ground during the attack on Benghazi and the agency is doing it’s level best to keep it a secret:


Reality Check

American Patriot's Reality Check

Report on CIA Personnel Takes Benghazi from ‘Phony’ Scandal to Immense Coverup

There has always been something unsettling about the September 11th attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, and a Thursday report on local CIA activity the night of the attack only adds to the unease.

CNN is reporting the CIA may have had upwards of 35 personnel in Benghazi on the night of the attack, and that “as many as seven [of these] were wounded.” An unnamed source claims these individuals are subjected to polygraph tests as frequently as once a month to monitor them for possible leaks to news outlets.


Since the assault’s immediate aftermath, the Obama administration was worked diligently to ensure the details of that night remain secret—even as the family members of four murdered Americans killed search for answers.


The White House initially refused to label the onslaught as a terror attack, despite the assassination of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stephens. Caught in the final months of the President’s reelection campaign, his subordinates instead promoted the idea of spontaneous protests caused by a YouTube video.


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2...mense-Cover-up

Related articles

• Rep. Wolf: Sources Say CIA Was Moving Guns in Benghazi (breitbart.com)
• CNN Bombshell: CIA Personnel in Benghazi Silenced with Threats by Obama Regime (ijreview.com)
• Bombshell: CNN report suggests Benghazi coverup worse than previously thought (twitchy.com)
• Real Cover-Up of CIA Activity at “Phony” Benghazi Scandal (reason.com)
• CNN Bombshell: Dozens of CIA Agents at Benghazi, Massive Coverup (capitalisminstitute.org)
• Phony Scandal: 35 Americans in Benghazi during attack, 7 wounded some seriously (fireandreamitchell.com)
• CNN Exclusive: Dozens of CIA operatives on the ground during Benghazi attack (rubinoworld.com)

August 2, 2013 Posted by americanpatriotrealitycheck | Benghazi, CIA | Benghazi, CIA, coverup, fake scadals, scandal | Leave a Comment

[American Patriot]

BREAKING! Benghazi Bombshell: Valerie Jarrett, Commander in Chief


by 02) Chip Jones on August 5, 2013

Confidential sources close to Conservative Report have confirmed that Valerie Jarrett was the key decision-maker for the administration, the night of the Benghazi terrorist attack on 9/11/2012.

The chronology of the evening of 9/11 are as follows:

At approximately 5 PM Washington time, reports came in through secure-channels that Special Mission Benghazi was under attack. Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey summoned the President,and briefed him on the crisis, face to face.

Subsequent to that brief meeting, President Obama proceeded to the White House to dine in his living quarters.




After supper, Barack Obama had a telephone conference scheduled with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Senior Advisor to the President, Valerie Jarrett was present for that conference, which was held due to problems the President was having with the perception of him snubbing Netanyahu in previous, formal encounters.

The telephone call between Obama and Netanyahu carried on for a full two-hours, creating the appearance of respect between the two world leaders.

As that meeting drew to a close, Ms. Jarrett, who is also the Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, went from the living quarters to the White House Situation Room, where the attack in Benghazi was being monitored by Dempsey, Panetta and other top-ranking officials.




Whether she was instructed by the President to go there, or if she went of her own volition, is only known by the President and herself.

A critical question that needed to be answered, and the sole military-order that could have launched offensive-actions, neutralizing the Ansar al Sharia terrorists attacks on the Mission (the purpose of which is detailed here) and its subsequent attacks on the adjacent CIA Annex, was the issuance of “Cross Border Authority”, an order that can only be issued by the Commander in Chief, himself.

As was reported earlier by Conservative Report, Cross Border Authority was denied.

Two revelations are deeply troubling:





First, it is reported that an Army Special Forces team was present with an AC-130U Spooky (also known as a Spectre Gunship) on the tarmac at the airport in Tripoli, Libya.

The Spooky is a technologically sophisticated, tactical aircraft, operated by the U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command.

It operates under the overall Special Operations Command stationed at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, which is reportedly in charge of all military special operations units, including: Army Special Forces, Navy SEALS, Rangers and certain Marine units, as well as the USAF AC-130Us, and “stealth Blackhawks,” used in the Bin Laden raid.



The AC-130U Spooky is equipped with weapons that sync with laser-designators, like those that Woods, Doherty and Ubben had on that lonely rooftop above the CIA Annex.

The laser-designator was used to “paint” the mortar targets during the attack, subsequently claiming the lives of Woods and Doherty, and leaving Ubben without a leg. Had the AC-130U been on station, over the CIA Annex in Benghazi, moments before the mortar rounds were fired, instead of "awaiting further instructions," the entire outcome of the Benghazi fiasco would have been different.

Add to that, a team of Green Berets on the ground to secure and/or evacuate the Annex, and the outcome would have been two SEALS still alive, and a mess of dead terrorists.



The second, and most troubling aspect of the refusal to issue Cross Border Authority is, who issued the refusal. Rather than the President, the Commander In Chief, making critical decisions, granting or denying the authority to initiate offensive-actions in support of our valiant fighting men, the decision not to take action was made by a person, to whom the people did not elect, nor did the Congress have confirmation power over.

The military-order, not to initiate action, saving our men in Benghazi, was issued by the President's Advisor, Valerie Jarrett.

And this is a “phony” scandal?

http://conservativereport.org/bengha...e-jarrett-cic/

[American Patriot]

Cross Border Authority: Congress, Ask the Right Benghazi Questions!

by 02) Chip Jones on June 9, 2013




The Benghazi investigation is mired in misinformation and inaccurate questioning. While the Congress pursues the question of a mysterious “stand down order”, the pursuit of administration responsibility remains dead in the water, and lazy pundits continue to write about a cover-up that pales in comparison to this administration’s abandoning two warriors to die on a lonely rooftop in Benghazi.


Are our Congressional investigators naïve, or are they part of a vast conspiracy to hide a simple truth from the American people about the decisions made & not made that fateful night?

You see ladies & gentlemen, in order for a “stand down” to be given, an order has to be given to ready those soldiers to “stand down” from. Here lies the crux of administration’s failures the night of Sept. 11, 2012.

No “stand down” order was ever issued, because the request for an order to engage in a foreign land was refused to begin with! To initiate offensive military operations in a foreign country, law requires a Presidential order commonly referred to a Cross Border Authority or CBA. In the absence of cross border authority being granted directly by the President, no military operation could be initiated, including the commitment of troops to secure or rescue personnel from Special Mission Benghazi.

It is well known that a distress signal went out from the CIA Annex before it was attacked. That distress signal, Tango Mike Mike, is used universally by our special operation forces and is used in remembrance of Master Sergeant Roy P. Benavidez, who received the Congressional Medal Of Honor for gallantry single-handedly rescuing an embattled and overwhelmed Green Beret detachment during the Vietnam War. He was known, fondly, as “That Mean Mexican”, and his call sign was “Tango Mike Mike”.

It is a matter of honor for our Special Forces to respond to “Tango Mike Mike”, and this author has no doubt that Special Forces troops were prepared to go on the offensive in Benghazi.

It has been sparsely reported that a Special Forces Alpha Team bordered a C-130 Spectre and awaited “authority” to commit to Benghazi. It is likely they were staged at the order of SOC-AFRICA (Special Operations Command for Africa) with the approval of AFRICOM (The geographic Combat Command for Africa).

I am personally challenging the Congressional investigators to ask the following three questions:

1. Was Cross Border Authority requested by our operation commanders assigned to North Africa?
2. Which particular Officer requested it?
3. Was Cross Border Authority granted?

The answers to these three questions lead responsibility directly to the Commanders in Africa, and ultimately to the President, who is the only one tasked with issuing cross border authority.

And to those same Congressional investigators, I am issuing this warning: If you fail to ask these three simple questions, you are each as guilty as this President of leaving Ty Woods and Glen Doherty dead on that lonely rooftop so far from home…..Equally as guilty of cowardice…Equally as guilty of dereliction of duty.

Listen to

Conservative Report Radio

Dec. 7, 2012 starting at 18 minutes and 40 seconds

Tango-Mike-Mike: History of Special Force Operations & Inaction in Benghazi

Video on this link: http://conservativereport.org/hey-co...azi-questions/

Listen to internet radio with Conservative Report on BlogTalkRadio

[vector7]

Attorney for Whistleblower: 400 U.S. Missiles Stolen in Benghazi

---

Print Article Send a Tip

by AWR Hawkins 12 Aug 2013, 12:05 PM PDT post a comment


On August 12, Joe DiGenova, attorney for one of the Benghazi whistleblowers, told Washington D.C.'s WMAL that one of the reasons people have remained tight-lipped about Benghazi is because 400 U.S. missiles were "diverted to Libya" and ended up being stolen and falling into "the hands of some very ugly people."

DiGenova represents Benghazi whistleblower Mark Thompson. He told WMAL that he "does not know whether [the missiles] were at the annex, but it is clear the annex was somehow involved in the distribution of those missiles."

He claimed his information "comes from a former intelligence official who stayed in constant contact with people in the special ops and intelligence community." He said the biggest concern right now is finding those missiles before they can be put to use. "They are worried, specifically according to these sources, about an attempt to shoot down an airliner," he claimed.

On August 4, Breitbart News covered a report in The Telegraph that said 35 CIA operatives were working in Benghazi when the attack against the consulate took place. The Telegraph claimed these operatives were allegedly in an "annex near the consulate [working] on a project to supply missiles from Libyan armories to Syrian Rebels."

Months earlier, following then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta's February 7 testimony on Capitol Hill about the Benghazi attacks, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) suggested that one of the causes behind the terrorist attack "may have been that there was a gun running operation going on in Benghazi, leaving Libya and going to Turkey and [distributing] arms to the [Syrian] rebels."

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins.

[American Patriot]

I reblogged this last evening.... it was... well, eye opening.