Liveleak.com Rss Feed -

Al-Qaeda linked militia in Libya beheads a captive Warning, extremely graphic

golem — Sun, 19 May 2013 01:03:19 -0400

This happened very recently in Derna. A coastal city in Eastern Libya.The uploader of the video, a libyan citizen states that the perpetrators were members of Al-Qaeda. Derna is also the headquarters of the Islamist Ansar-Al Sharia Militia which has extensive ties to Al-Qaeda. This militia, along with members of Al-Qaeda played a role in the Benghazi consulate attack on 9/11. It was also considered an ally of the Obama administration during the Libyan war in the overthrow of Qaddafi. They were deployed as security for the Benghazi embassy by the Obama administration leading up to 9/11 before they decided to attack the consulate

Syria - SIF IED attack vs SSF car + aftermath 16/05

CptSpaulding — Sat, 18 May 2013 17:55:24 -0400

Syrian Islamic Front - Ansar Battalion IED attack vs Syrian Security Forces car Houla 16/05

Syria - SIF attacks SAA militiamen 17/05

CptSpaulding — Sat, 18 May 2013 17:49:49 -0400

Syrian Islamic Front - Right Brigade Ansar battalion rebels attack SAA militiamen, one of them almost was sniped Homs 17/05

Syria - Ansar al-Islam rebels attack SAA tank, helicopter and more 08/05

CptSpaulding — Wed, 08 May 2013 12:57:11 -0400

Ansar al-Islam Mustafa Habib Brigades Nourein Battalion Al-Jarba 08/05

Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference

Detroit Iron — Fri, 10 May 2013 09:35:37 -0400

May 10, 2013 6:33am By Jonathan Karl When it became clear last fall that the CIA's now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed, the White House said repeatedly the documents were put together almost entirely by the intelligence community, but White House documents reviewed by Congress suggest a different story. ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack. White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department. The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack. That would appear to directly contradict what White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said about the talking points in November. "Those talking points originated from the intelligence community. They reflect the IC's best assessments of what they thought had happened," Carney told reporters at the White House press briefing on November 28, 2012. "The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word 'consulate' to 'diplomatic facility' because 'consulate' was inaccurate." Summaries of White House and State Department emails - some of which were first published by Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard - show that the State Department had extensive input into the editing of the talking points. State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland raised specific objections to this paragraph drafted by the CIA in its earlier versions of the talking points: "The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa'ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya. These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador's convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks." In an email to officials at the White House and the intelligence agencies, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland took issue with including that information because it "could be abused by members to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either? Concerned ..." The paragraph was entirely deleted. Like the final version used by Ambassador Rice on the Sunday shows, the CIA's first drafts said the attack appeared to have been "spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo" but the CIA version went on to say, "That being said, we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa'ida participated in the attack." The draft went on to specifically name the al Qaeda-affiliated group named Ansar al-Sharia. Once again, Nuland objected to naming the terrorist groups because "we don't want to prejudice the investigation." In response, an NSC staffer coordinating the review of the talking points wrote back to Nuland, "The FBI did not have major concerns with the points and offered only a couple minor suggestions." After the talking points were edited slightly to address Nuland's concerns, she responded that changes did not go far enough. "These changes don't resolve all of my issues or those of my buildings leadership," Nuland wrote. In an email dated 9/14/12 at 9:34 p.m. - three days after the attack and two days before Ambassador Rice appeared on the Sunday shows - Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes wrote an email saying the State Department's concerns needed to be addressed. "We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don't want to undermine the FBI investigation. We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting." Related: Diplomat Says Requests For Benghazi Rescue Were Rejected After that meeting, which took place Saturday morning at the White House, the CIA drafted the final version of the talking points - deleting all references to al Qaeda and to the security warnings in Benghazi prior to the attack. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said none of this contradicts what he said about the talking points because ultimately all versions were actually written and signed-off by the CIA. "The CIA drafted these talking points and redrafted these talking points," Carney said. "The fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this, but the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and nonsubstantive. They corrected the description of the building or the facility in Benghazi from consulate to diplomatic facility and the like. And ultimately, this all has been discussed and reviewed and provided in enormous levels of detail by the administration to Congressional investigators, and the attempt to politicize the talking points, again, is part of an effort to, you know, chase after what isn't the substance here." UPDATE: A source familiar with the White House emails on the Benghazi talking point revisions say that State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland was raising two concerns about the CIA's first version of talking points, which were going to be sent to Congress: 1) The talking points went further than what she was allowed to say about the attack during her state department briefings; and, 2) she believed the CIA was attempting to exonerate itself at the State Department's expense by suggesting CIA warnings about the security situation were ignored. In one email, Nuland asked, why are we suggest Congress "start making assertions to the media that we ourselves are not making because we don't want to prejudice the investigation?" One other point: The significant edits - deleting references to al Qaeda and the CIA's warnings - came after a White House meeting on the Saturday before Ambassador Susan Rice appeared on five Sunday shows. Nuland, a 30-year foreign service veteran who has served under Democratic and Republican Secretaries of State, was not at that meeting and played no direct role in preparing Rice for her interviews. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/exclusive-benghazi-talking-points-underwent-12-revisions-scrubbed-of-terror-references/

Video: Islamic Militia suspected for killing the American Ambassador in Libya continues to patrol freely the city of Sfax, Tunisia

AEI — Fri, 10 May 2013 04:29:57 -0400

The Ansar Al Sharia Islamic Group is said to be behind the attacks against US embassies in North Africa and still operates freely in Libya and Tunisia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansar_al-Sharia_%28Libya%29 http://news.yahoo.com/libya-militia-linked-u-attack-returns-benghazi-141851547.html

Salafist Kamel Zarouq Talks of Future Conquest

euronymus — Sun, 12 May 2013 07:08:04 -0400

On conquering Andalusia, Rome, Jerusalem.

Syria vis a vis the Palestinians in Lebanon in case you were wondering

SunniLebanese — Thu, 16 May 2013 17:09:45 -0400

Syria crisis threatens Palestinian refugeesPro- and anti-Assad factions seek support of Palestinians in Lebanon's refugee camps as tensions there rise over Syria. Zak Brophy Last Modified: 16 May 2013 10:49 The Palestinian community in Lebanon is socially vulnerable and politically divided Beirut, Lebanon - The Palestinian refugee camp of Shatila is perilously wedged along one of Lebanon's many sectarian fault lines. Black Islamic flags adorn the lampposts when approaching this small slum from Sunni strongholds to the north, while expansive Shia ghettoes border the camp immediately to the south. In recent months, an increasing number of clashes have erupted in and around Shatila, as rival Lebanese factions fight for the loyalty of the socially vulnerable and politically divided Palestinian camps. The Syrian civil war and rising Shia-Sunni discord in Lebanon are exacerbating the pressure. "These are concerted efforts to provoke a response," explained Fathi Abou al-Ardat, secretary for the Fatah movement and the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) in Lebanon. On May 12, clashes - described by local residents as the most intense fighting yet - erupted between groups inside Shatila and neighbouring Shia communities. Volleys of gunfire were exchanged for several hours, and the army encircled the camp with armoured personnel carriers. "We know the Palestinians are divided and some groups are exploiting that to stir things up here. We are not taking the bait, but these groups have to know that if they push too hard we will run all over them like we did in 2008," said Abu Ali, a resident of the Rihaab district, a predominantly Shia neighbourhood on the edge of Shatila. Palestinian refugees struggle in Lebanon Although Shatila was founded as a Palestinian refugee camp, many non-Palestinians now live there as well. Ahmad, a 20-year-old Shatila resident with little education and scant work prospects, reasoned: "Us Sunna reacted strongly and started to boil over when we saw the killing in Syria. This caused clashes with Shia because they are helping with the slaughter of our people there." Losing faith Syrian President Bashar al-Assad comes from the Alawite sect - an offshoot of Shia Islam - and the powerful Lebanese Shia group Hezbollah supports Assad. Like many of his peers, Ahmad has lost faith in the traditional Sunni leadership and places his trust instead with more religiously conservative and combative leaders such as Sheikh Ahmad Assir, who have been trying to garner support from predominantly Sunni Palestinians. "There are more and more of us prepared to follow Assir," said Ahmad. "More and more people are becoming increasingly religious. Everyone is preparing himself for what may come." The Palestinian camps in Lebanon consist of basic, overcrowded homes, their people victims of decades of war, neglect and abuse. In Shatila, the buildings are so cramped that sunlight is a rare commodity. The smells of garbage and sewage foul the air and unemployed youth fill the cramped alleys. "We are seeing increased efforts to recruit from our youth. There is desperation and anger here, so whatever they pay they will find people to say 'yes'. They think we are cheap," said Ayman Zaher, a youth worker in Shatila. All of the major Palestinian political parties have adopted, and until now managed to maintain, a policy of neutrality in Lebanon regardless of their stance on the conflict in Syria. However, in Ein el-Helweh, the largest and most populous camp in Lebanon, armed groups such as Jund al-Sham, Jabhat al-Nusra and Asbat al-Ansar have found a safe haven under the protective wing of powerful local families. Their number of followers may not be huge, but their hard-line ideology and links to like-minded movements in Lebanon and Syria make Ein el-Helweh a particularly worrying flashpoint for Palestinians and Lebanese alike. "There is so much pressure on the camps and they are ready to explode, especially Ein el-Helweh, which could go off before there is a wider conflict in Lebanon. There is so much provocation from the Islamist groups there and I'm not sure if the PLO can keep a lid on it," warned Mutuwalli Abu Naser, a Palestinian journalist and playwright from Yarmouk camp in Damascus, who now lives in Lebanon. SpotlightIn-depth coverage of escalating violence across Syria Syrian influence On the other side, Hezbollah and its allies have also been working to secure the allegiance of Palestinians in Lebanon. Until withdrawing its troops from Lebanon in 2005, the Syrian government was influential in many of the camps through various Palestinian allies. Since the Syrian withdrawal, Hezbollah has by-and-large maintained Syria's leverage in the camps, even though the stance of several Palestinian groups has shifted since the start of the Syrian uprising. "Hezbollah works by a very low profile without making noise, because they work with the Palestinians from a security background, not a political one," explained Edward Kattoura, a political analyst at Pursue, a Palestinian think-tank. Many of the Palestinian camps are located in Hezbollah-dominated areas, especially in Beirut, South Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley. Recently, Shaker Berjawi - a Sunni "strongman" in Beirut who earned his battlefield stripes in the Lebanese civil war - decided to move the headquarters of his pro-Syrian Arab Movement Party to the edge of Shatila, indicating the importance of the camp's support. While maintaining a local influence over the years, he has switched political allegiances numerous times, and he is now aligned with the Hezbollah-led camp. "It seems people use us as mercenaries, whether it be for one side or the other. When he opens up his office at the entrance to the camps, he is sending a message that the camps are part of his fight," said Kattoura. 'Sacrificial lamb' But many Palestinians in Lebanon are driven by nationalist rather than sectarian sensibilities, and the camps may be able to stay out of internal Lebanese conflict. "Most of Lebanese have a view of the camps as a source of militia fighters and criminals. There is destitution and desperation, it is true, but in fact they are much less sectarian than most of Lebanese society," said Moe Ali Nayel, a Lebanese writer and activist who regularly works in the camps. "The Palestinians are used like a sacrificial lamb in Lebanon. Lebanese groups like to have Palestinians up front and then the blame can be put on us. " - Marwan Abdulal, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine And the Palestinians' time in Lebanon has cruelly taught them while their loyalty is dear, their blood is cheap, whether it be the massacre at Sabra and Shatila at the hands of Christian militias in 1982, the "War of the Camps" from 1985-87 between the Shia Amal Movement and Palestinian refugees, or the bombardment of Nahr Bared camp by the Lebanese army in 2007. "The Palestinians are used like a sacrificial lamb in Lebanon. Lebanese groups like to have Palestinians up front and then the blame can be put on us," said Marwan Abdulal, member of the political bureau for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. The Palestinian camps can hope to stay detached from the conflict in Lebanon as long as the fighting is constrained to the prevailing pattern of intermittent local clashes and firebrand speeches. However, should the situation escalate, residents will be hard pressed not to get dragged into the affray. "It will be very difficult for the camps to stay aside if this descends into a serious fitna ," warned the PLO's Fathi Abou al-Ardat. "The general atmosphere, the speeches, all of it is setting the stage for a fitna . In reality, it is already here." http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/05/20135791049958517.html

Police hire informants to Kill, and Hillary's Benghazi Cover-Up?

SvenVonErick — Thu, 09 May 2013 20:54:09 -0400

Image found here . Police hire state registered confidential informants to beat up, kill, and set up police targets. It is for retaliation, revenue collection, property confiscation, and to protect the racketeering turf, prostitution rings, heroin and crack cocaine trafficking, house break-in rings, vandalism for charging property owners fines for having broken windows and damaged siding, and for making police, lawyers, government insiders, organized crime, international bankers, and corporate criminals more money. So what does that have to do with Libya, Hillary Clinton, and the murder of US Libyan Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens ]? Were rocket propelled grenade launchers and shoulder fire missiles gotten into the hands of alleged Barack Obama and international banker run Al Qaeda? Is there to be attacks on US Aircraft in the US to put the US under Martial Law where DHS and military contractors can run check points to further rip off and abuse all Americans? Why is the US Department of Homeland Security buying billions of rounds of ammunition and driving wheeled tanks on US roads? Was Chris Stevens murdered to cover up a CIA and international banker plot? Should Hillary Clinton be prosecuted. Should Obama and US Attorney Barack Obama be prosecuted for their roles in the taxpayers scammed out tax dollars for the ATF' "Fast and Furious" program/Psy-Op to end the 2nd Amendment? Should Obama and Eric Holder be prosecuted for being accessories to murders having facilitated guns getting into the hands of Mexican Drug gangs to commit murders? Were Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton, Arkansas State Police brass, and other Clinton cronies cocaine traffickers for the CIA and international bankers. Did Hillary Clinton order the murder of citizens who knew too much? Meet the Clintons ] Should Hillary Clinton be prosecuted for her role in the lying, cover up, and the murder of Christopher Stevens? Should Hillary and Bill be prosecuted for their roles as druglords and kingpins and for their past murder spree? A post to go with the below video ] Vermont US Senator Patrick Leahy shut up after the Connecticut version of the CIA allegedly sent him Antrax in a letter. Was Leahy terrorized into being a puppet for international bankers and US police organized crime? What do former US Attorney, former Connecticut State Police Commissioner and now Judge John A. Danaher III and former UConn student Tomas Foral have to do with the Anthrax Hoax back in 2001? That story ] Text and Links to go with Alex Jones video: Text with video: Published on May 9, 2013 Top U.S. Diplomat in Libya Knew Benghazi Was Terrorism Daily Beast For eleven days after the 9/11 anniversary assault on the U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, top Obama administration officials told the public that the assault stemmed from a protest of an anti-Muslim YouTube video. That was the public line from the White House in the closing weeks of a presidential election season, but it was not the view of several State Department officials at the time or the U.S. personnel on the ground in Libya. At a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Benghazi Wednesday, Trey Goudy, a Republican from South Carolina, read into the record an email from Beth Jones, the acting assistant secretary of state for Near East Affairs. The September 12 email-disclosed for the first time on Wednesday-said Jones had spoken to Libya's ambassador to Washington who said the attack was the work of former Gadhafi regime loyalists. Jones said she told the ambassador: "The group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists." Jones was not the only one who viewed the attack as the work of terrorists. Gregory Hicks, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. embassy in Tripoli at the time, said there were no reports from U.S. personnel in Libya there was a demonstration. In often-dramatic testimony, Hicks provided new details of the attack in the evening of Benghazi. He said he had no doubt the assault on the U.S. compound in Benghazi at the time was a terrorist attack, noting that Ansar al-Sharia had claimed credit for the assault on its twitter feed. Indeed, the U.S. embassy in Tripoli believed it would be attacked next. Hicks said embassy personnel smashed hard drives, loaded weapons into armored vehicles and that the 55 embassy employees in Tripoli that evening were gathered in a safe annex all in anticipation of the attack. http://www.infowars.com/latest-on-ben... https://twitter.com/RealAlexJones https://www.facebook.com/AlexanderEme... * * * * Click here for Steven G. Erickson LiveLeak.com posts and video uploads ] Text and Links to go with Connecticut State Police state registered confidential informant video: Uploaded on Jan 26, 2008 Police hire informants to kill, MORE: http://starkravingviking.blogspot.com... keywords: informants, Connecticut, police, prosecutorial, prosecutor, judge, judicial, judiciary, misconduct, brutality, Hartford, Capitol, legislative, building, Colchester, Troop K, Connecticut State Police, Briger, Lieutenant, Sargent, LT, Sgt., Richard, Nardella, Tom, Charles, Scott, Thomas, Ian, Steven, Stephen, Steve, Murzin, Rich, Richard, Phillip, Inkel, Todd, Vashon, kill, murder for hire, hit man, governor, rell, Kevin, Kane, States, Attorney, lawyer, counsel, FBI, IAD, Internal Affairs, investigation, indictment, prosecution, Richard C. Blumenthal, Attorney General, John G. Rowland, F. Mac Mack Buckley, Hartford, mafia, gang, gangland killing, prostitute, informant, tax, money, dollars, corruption, Massachusetts, New York, city, town, sealed, records, transcripts, protest, action, legal, docket, number, price, fee, district, bribe, perjury, lying, false, dead, Los Angeles, street gang, gun, shoot, knife, chain, handcuffs, prison, prisoner, probation, parole, terms, years, months, days, hours, guard, DOC, DMR, UConn, Stafford Springs, Ellington, Vernon, Rockville, Judge Jonathan J. Kaplan, Steven G. Erickson, Jeffrey R. Yeaw, Arthur L. Spada, Commissioner, department, deputy, sheriff, marshal, senator, representative, crime, punishment, slander, false, statement, political, error, freedom, reform, rally, rights, civil, US, America, Constitution, George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton, election, propaganda, free enterprise, speech, redress, grievances, complain, testify, oath, promise, breach, downtown, urban, blight, riot, unrest, peace, California, Washington, DC, cell phone, files, hidden, private, juvenile, detective, narcotics, thug, trooper, officer, retaliation, intimidation, circumvent, tease, taser, mayhem, rape, robbery, mugging, mugger, self defense, hospital, care, intensive, ambulance, mercy, prayer, confidence, secret, priest, pedophile, list, sex, offender, bicycle, mask, badge, police misconduct complaint, Connecticut, Martial Law, racism, bias, blatant,

Syria - FSA rebels B10 attack vs SAA positions 29/04 -2 VIDEOS-

CptSpaulding — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:29:13 -0400

FSA Ansar al-Islam rebels attack SAA positions with B10 recoiless gun Ar-Rastan 29/04

Pat Buchanan : The Dark Side of Diversity

MagicSonny — Sat, 27 Apr 2013 06:50:33 -0400

"I do not know the method of drawing up an indictment against a whole people," said Edmund Burke of the rebellious Americans. The same holds true of Islam, the majority faith of 49 nations from Morocco to Indonesia, a religion that 1.6 billion people profess. Yet, some assertions appear true. Islam is growing in militancy and intolerance, evolving again into a fighting faith, and spreading not only through proselytizing, but violence. How to justify the charge of intolerance? The Taliban blew up the Bamiyan Buddhas. The Sufi shrines of Timbuktu were blown up by Ansar Dine. In Saudi Arabia, Iran and Afghanistan, Christian converts face the death sentence. In Nigeria, the Boko Haram attacks churches and kills Christians, as in Ethiopia and the Sudan, where the south seceded over the persecution. Egyptian Copts are under siege. Assyrian and Chaldean Christians in Iraq have seen churches pillaged, priests murdered. In Indonesia, churches are being shut on the demand of Islamists. Sharia law is being demanded by militants across the Middle East, as Christianity is exterminated in its cradle. Has Islam become again a fighting faith? Chechnya, Dagestan and Ingushetia are the sites of Islamist uprisings using terror to rip these statelets from Russia. Muslim Uighurs are fighting to tear off a chunk of China and create an East Turkestan. Muslim Malays in south Thailand have fought a decade-long war of secession. Albania has acquired two sister Muslim states in Europe, Bosnia and Kosovo, both born in blood. "Islam has bloody borders," wrote the late Samuel Huntington. They are bloodier today. At the time of 9/11, al-Qaida seemed confined to Afghanistan. Al-Qaida may now be found in the Maghreb, Mali, Iraq and Yemen. Its Syrian auxiliary, the al-Nusra Front, is dominant in the anti-Assad rebellion. Since Y2K, Islamists have perpetrated massacres in Mumbai, Madrid, London, Moscow, Beslan and Boston. Osama bin Laden appears no longer as popular as he once was, yet tens of millions worldwide still admire him. Why? Islamism can also call upon true believers prepared to die for the cause. No other faith produces so many suicide bombers. Muslims counter-argue that America has killed many more noncombatants, in Iraq, and Afghanistan and Pakistan with drone strikes. What right, they ask, did we have to attack Iraq? Did we not ourselves stir up the nest of hornets that stung us in Boston? Yet there is another reality. While the clash of cultures widens between the West and Islam, leaders in the Muslim world can be found working with the United States against their own extremists. Jihadists are by no means a majority in the Islamic world, where they are also feared and hated. And in the West, they are but a fraction of our Muslim communities. The crisis: Even a tiny minority of terrorists like the Tsarnaevs can so inflame tensions between the West and the Muslim world they can bring our two civilizations into conflict. Would we have fought those wars in Iraq and Afghanistan without the atrocity of 9/11? What are the goals of the jihadists? Expulsion of Christians and infidels from the Dar al-Islam, the house of Islam. Expulsion of the American Crusaders. Overthrow of Muslim rulers who collude with the Great Satan. Annihilation of Israel. Infiltration of the homelands of a decadent, dying West. Death to all who insult the Prophet. Ultimate goal: Bring the world to acknowledge and act on the truth that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet. And while the Islamic world remains far inferior in technology and manufacturing and military power, Muslim peoples are far more numerous and devout. With a fourth of mankind, their birth rate is higher and their numbers soaring, along with their militancy at home and in the diaspora. In population and territory, the West is shrinking, while our Muslim minorities are growing and becoming more assertive in their demands. "No army can withstand the strength of an idea whose time has come," said Victor Hugo. Many in the Muslim world believe that as the Christian West dominated for 500 years, their time has come. How do we deal with this irreconcilable conflict between a secular West and a resurgent Islam? First, as it is our presence in their world that enrages so many, we should end our interventions, shut down the empire and let Muslim rulers deal with Muslim radicals. Second, we need a moratorium on immigration from the Islamic world. Inevitably, some of the young we bring in, like the Tsarnaevs, will yield to radicalization and seek to strike a blow for Islam against us. What benefit do we derive as a people to justify the risks we take by opening up America to mass migration from a world aflame with hatred and hostility over race, ethnicity, culture, history and faith? Why are we bringing all of the world's quarrelsome minorities, and all the world's quarrels with them, into our home? What we saw in Boston was the dark side of diversity. Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of "Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?" http://news.yahoo.com/dark-side-diversity-070000603.html

THE UTTER INSANITY OF OBAMA AND THE CIA STARTING WORLD WAR 3 IN THE MIDDLE EAST!!!!!!!

True Prophet — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 20:43:21 -0400

THE UTTER INSANITY OF OBAMA AND THE CIA STARTING WORLD WAR 3 IN THE MIDDLE EAST!!!!!!! MUST READ DOCUMENTS Benghazi CIA Compound Attack Explained- Behind the Lies to Start World War 3 http://www.scribd.com/doc/116766999/Benghazi-CIA-Compound-Attack-Explained-Behind-the-Lies-to-Start-World-War-3 Benghazi Explained- Interview With an 'Intelligence Insider' http://www.scribd.com/doc/116756604/Benghazi-Explained-Interview-With-an-Intelligence-Insider Chaffetz- State Dept Hiding Benghazi Survivors http://www.scribd.com/doc/116756607/Chaffetz-State-Dept-Hiding-Benghazi-Survivors WHITE HOUSE INSIDER- 'Barack Obama - The Butcher of Benghazi' http://www.scribd.com/doc/116767020/WHITE-HOUSE-INSIDER-Barack-Obama-%E2%80%93-The-Butcher-of-Benghazi Documents Released Pertaining to Security at the Bengazi CIA Villa http://www.scribd.com/doc/116759802/Documents-Released-Pertaining-to-Security-at-the-Bengazi-CIA-Villa Photos of Bengazi CIA Villa Before and After the 9-11-12 Attack http://www.scribd.com/doc/116759271/Photos-of-Bengazi-CIA-Villa-Before-and-After-the-9-11-12-Attack Benghazi CIA Compound Attack Explained- Behind the Lies to Start World War 3 Please comment on this article at Canada Free Press By Douglas J. Hagmann 2 December 2012: Author's note: This is a special supplement of a multi-part interview with a government insider intimately familiar with the events that took place in Benghazi. It is important to note that the information contained in this series was developed from interviews that spanned over 100 hours. My source requested that the following information be written separately due to its importance. DH: You told me that you wanted to talk about the lies behind Benghazi, said it is critical for everyone to understand the reason for the lies. and asked that we do this separately. Go ahead. II: It's about the lie, and once you understand it, it becomes extremely revealing. It's about what the public has been told from the very beginning. Do you realize that a lot of people, especially Obama's associates and supporters do not believe that they've been lied to? Do you understand that much of the public does not believe that they were lied to? Like a lot of us, you're in this thing so deep that we forget not everyone even believes they've been lied to. They're certainly not going to hear about it in the media. To understand how deep this goes, how important it is, and why it is so important, we've got to go back to the very beginning. Think back to when we were first told that Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Dougherty, Tyrone Woods were killed in Benghazi. The media reported that Stevens and the others were killed in an attack on the American consulate in Benghazi. Every major media outlet identified the location of the attack as an American consulate, much like this Reuters report and this from The Washington Times. But there was no U.S. consulate in Benghazi, so where did this information originate? DH: Didn't the administration call it a consulate? II: Exactly. Our embassies and consulate offices are directly under the control of the U.S. State Department. They are areas of sovereign territory. Consulate offices are like satellite offices to each embassy, and they are located in convenient geographic locations in other countries to assist people with routine or minor matters, saving them a trip to the actual embassy. Consulates are easily identifiable and all have U.S. flags flying prominently for easy identification. A listing of U.S. embassies and consulate offices in other countries can be found on the State Department web site. Just about everyone working at State knows the locations of the embassies and consulates, as do most of our leaders in the executive branch. So from the outset, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama certainly knew, without any doubt, that there was no consulate or diplomatic mission in Benghazi. None. In fact, on August 27, 2012, just 15 days before the attack in Benghazi, Ambassador Chris Stevens ceremoniously opened the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli with the U.S. State Department issuing press releases and official statements. Tripoli was the only diplomatic mission in Libya - period. And it was just established. So one of the very first lies was to deliberate misidentify or improperly characterize the compound in Benghazi as a consulate. Was there an American flag flying outside of this compound? No. Was any diplomatic legitimate business being conducted at this compound? No. But they called it a consulate to draw attention away from the fact this was a CIA base of operations. It was located in a relatively rural area, and it consisted of a residence and a separate "annex" located about 1800 feet away. By car, the annex was just over a mile away. It was difficult to find, too. People coming from Tripoli to this compound often got turned around, even with the help of a GPS. So the very first thing everyone must understand is that the administration, including Barack Obama and others in the executive branch, and the State Department, including Hillary Clinton (her official statement identified the compound as a mission, suggesting a 'diplomatic mission') knew that this compound served no legitimate diplomatic purpose. That's the first lie. DH: We now know that it was a CIA compound located in a somewhat rural area and not identifiable as U.S. owned or operated. II: Correct. So think about this. The compound was unmarked, operationally discreet, located in a rural area and difficult to find. How did a few hundred protesters suddenly gather at this location on the evening of 9/11? How did they know where to go, if this was not an embassy or consulate? More to the point, how is it possible that anyone in any official capacity in this administration could realistically describe the attack in terms of a protest gone bad, even at the first reports of trouble? They could not. This was a deliberate lie to the American people. So how is it that U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice, five days after the attack and after much of the initial dust settled, appeared on five national news shows and still attributed the murders of Americans as a result of protests? Who told her to do that? And, she continued to blame the murders on an obscure internet video. Why? DH: They have since publicly reclassified the description of the location. II: They had to because they could not continue to call the CIA operations center an embassy or consulate. But they have yet to offer any reasonable explanation for what happened there. Barack Obama has yet to look the family members of Tyrone Woods, Sean Smith, or Glen Dougherty in the eyes and tell the truth. He has yet to tell Americans the truth about the events of 9/11, and the reason for the lies, which continue through today. No one has stepped up to tell the truth. We have only seen denials reinforced by distractions., They continue to lie to this day. Who are they lying to and what is the logical reason for the lies? They are only lying to the American people. All other governments know what's going on. And most importantly, the reason they are continuing to lie is to cover up their plans as they are moving forward with their agenda. Everyone must understand how important this is. The Obama plan continues. No one is stopping them or this agenda. And in case you have any questions about what this agenda is, let me explain it clearly and concisely. Obama, Clinton, their foreign policy advisors and the people involved in this agenda intend to start a war that will make Afghanistan and Iraq look like a small police action by comparison. They are going to start a war that will likely grow from a regional war to a global war, or WW III. Afghanistan 'imploded' when attacked, as did Iraq. Syria will not, it will explode . Do the American people understand this? Until now, everyone has been focused on the 'little lies.' The security, the misidentification of the CIA compound, the timeline, and on and on. They want us to focus on the little lies so they can pull off the BIG LIE . The big lie being told is that the U.S. is merely providing minimal support, including humanitarian aid to the Syrians so they can defend themselves from Assad. That's the big lie that covers up what they are really doing in the region. The CIA compound in Benghazi was a logistics hub for weapons, but not only weapons from Libya. Weapons ordered by and destined for other countries, like Saudi Arabia, the UAE and other countries, knowing the plan, were allowing the weapons to be diverted, with Libya acting as the central shipping hub. When Assad falls and U.S. troops are called in for ground support, who will they be fighting? The Syrian army? No, they will be fighting the Iranian army, the Russian army and the Chinese army. Why? Because Iran, Russia and China all have a stake in the region. Putin called Syria his red line in the sand, and stated that WW III will start in Syria, not Iran. Benghazi is a moving target of little lies that serve as cover for the big lie. Are Americans onboard? http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/archives/7210#more-7210 Statement by Secretary Clinton on the Attack in Benghazi Press Statement Hillary Rodham Clinton Secretary of State Washington, DC September 11, 2012 I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. As we work to secure our personnel and facilities, we have confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed. We are heartbroken by this terrible loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and those who have suffered in this attack. This evening, I called Libyan President Magariaf to coordinate additional support to protect Americans in Libya. President Magariaf expressed his condemnation and condolences and pledged his government's full cooperation. Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind. In light of the events of today, the United States government is working with partner countries around the world to protect our personnel, our missions, and American citizens worldwide. http://statedept.tumblr.com/post/31380336590/statement-by-secretary-clinton-on-the-attack-in Libyans burn U.S. Consulate in Benghazi; U.S. official killed Egyptian protesters climb the walls of the U.S. Embassy during a protest in Cairo on Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2012. (AP Photo/Nasser Nasser) By Ashish Kumar Sen - The Washington Times Tuesday, September 11, 2012 A U.S. official was killed and others injured when an armed mob attacked the U.S. Consulate in Libya's eastern port city of Benghazi on Tuesday. The building has burned down, according to multiple sources in Libya. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton condemned "in the strongest terms" the attack. Mrs. Clinton confirmed that one State Department officer had been killed. "We are heartbroken by this terrible loss," she said. Mrs. Clinton spoke on the phone with Libyan National Assembly President Mohamed Yousef Al-Megariaf to coordinate protection of Americans in his country. The mob in Benghazi was angry over a video reportedly produced in the U.S., which they said was insulting to Islam's prophet, Muhammad. "Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet," Mrs. Clinton said. The U.S. deplores "any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. ... But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind," she added. Earlier, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland blamed "a group of militants" for the attack. "We are working with the Libyans now to secure the compound," she said in a statement on Tuesday night. "We condemn in strongest terms this attack on our diplomatic mission," she added. In Egypt's capital, Cairo, protesters stormed the U.S. Embassy and tore down the flag. This is the second time the U.S. mission in Benghazi has been attacked. In June, a bomb exploded outside the U.S. diplomatic mission soon after the U.S. confirmed the death of Abu Yahya al-Libi, a Libyan-born cleric and al Qaeda operative, in a drone attack in Pakistan. Al Qaeda leader confirmed al-Libi's death in a message delivered on Tuesday to mark the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. The revolution against Moammar Gadhafi's regime first started in Benghazi in February of 2011. The uprising quickly spread across Libya and toppled the 42-year-old dictatorship of Gadhafi, who was killed in the custody of rebels in his hometown of Sirte on Oct. 20 last year. About the Author Ashish Kumar Sen Ashish Kumar Sen is a reporter covering foreign policy and international developments for The Washington Times. Prior to joining The Times, Mr. Sen worked for publications in Asia and the Middle East. His work has appeared in a number of publications and online news sites including the British Broadcasting Corp., Asia Times Online and Outlook magazine. http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/11/libyans-storm-burn-us-consulate-benghazi/ Obama vows to track down ambassador's killers . . inShare 0 . Share this . . Email . Print Related News . Intrepid U.S. envoy Stevens nurtured Libyan democracy Wed, Sep 12 2012 . Smoke, confusion and a missing ambassador in Libya attack Wed, Sep 12 2012 . Obama vows justice after U.S. envoy killed in Libya Wed, Sep 12 2012 . U.S.-trained engineer picked as Libya's next premier Wed, Sep 12 2012 . Top U.S. military officer calls pastor over film Wed, Sep 12 2012 . U.S. evacuates staff from Benghazi, cuts Tripoli embassy staff Wed, Sep 12 2012 . New York police add security in wake of Libya protests Wed, Sep 12 2012 By Matt Spetalnick and Hadeel Al Shalchi WASHINGTON/BENGHAZI, Libya Wed Sep 12, 2012 7:49pm EDT WASHINGTON/BENGHAZI, Libya (Reuters) - President Barack Obama branded the killing of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans an "outrageous attack" on Wednesday and vowed to track down the perpetrators, while ordering a tightening of diplomatic security worldwide. The ambassador, Christopher Stevens, and the other Americans were killed after Islamist gunmen attacked the U.S. consulate and a safe house refuge in Benghazi on Tuesday night. The attackers were part of a mob blaming America for a film they said insulted the Prophet Mohammad. The violence in the eastern city, a cradle of Libya's U.S.-backed uprising against Muammar Gaddafi last year, came on the anniversary of al Qaeda's attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001. Another assault was mounted on the U.S. embassy in Cairo in which protesters, who included Islamists and teenage soccer fans, tore down and burned a U.S. flag. U.S. government officials said the Benghazi attack may have been planned in advance and there were indications that members of a militant faction calling itself Ansar al Sharia - which translates as Supporters of Islamic Law - may have been involved. They also said some reporting from the region suggested that members of Al-Qaeda's north Africa-based affiliate, known as Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, may have been involved. "It bears the hallmarks of an organized attack," one U.S. official said. However, some U.S. officials cautioned against assuming that the attacks were deliberately organized to coincide with the September 11 anniversary. The violence in Benghazi and Cairo threatened to spread to other Muslim countries on Wednesday. A U.S. official said Washington had ordered the evacuation of all U.S. personnel from Benghazi to Tripoli and was reducing staffing in the capital to emergency levels. Police fired teargas at angry demonstrators outside the U.S. embassy in Tunisia and several hundred people gathered in front of the U.S. embassy in Sudan. In Morocco, a few dozen protesters burned American flags and chanted slogans near the U.S. consulate in Casablanca. Obama vowed on Wednesday to bring the Benghazi killers to justice. He called the attack "outrageous and shocking" but insisted it would not threaten relations with Libya's new elected government. U.S. SECURITY STEPPED UP WORLDWIDE The president said he had ordered an increase in security at U.S. diplomatic posts around the globe. A U.S. official said a Marine anti-terrorist security team was being sent to Libya to boost security there. The attacks could alter U.S. attitudes towards the wave of revolutions across the Arab world, which toppled secularist authoritarian leaders in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia , bringing Islamists to power. The violence could also have an impact on the closely-fought U.S. presidential election campaign. Mitt Romney , Obama's rival in the November vote, criticized the president's response to the crisis. He said the timing of a statement from the U.S. embassy in Cairo denouncing "efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims" made Obama look weak as protesters were attacking U.S. missions. He said it was "disgraceful" to be seen to be apologizing for American values of free speech. Obama's campaign accused Romney of scoring political points at a time of national tragedy. Images of ambassador Stevens purportedly taken after he died circulated on the Internet. One image showed him being carried, with a white shirt pulled up and a cut on his forehead. Libya's Deputy Interior Minister Wanis Al-Sharif said U.S. staff were rushed to a Benghazi safe house after the initial attack on the consulate and an evacuation plane with U.S. commando units then arrived from Tripoli to evacuate them from the safe house. "It was supposed to be a secret place and we were surprised the armed groups knew about it. There was shooting," Sharif said. Two U.S. personnel were killed there, he said. Two other people were killed at the main consular building and between 12 and 17 wounded. The attack raised questions about the future U.S. diplomatic presence in Libya, relations between Washington and Tripoli, and the unstable security situation after Gaddafi's overthrow. Witnesses said the mob included tribesmen, militia and other gunmen. Hamam, a 17-year-old who took part in the attack, said Ansar al-Sharia cars arrived at the start of the protest but left once fighting started. "The protesters were running around the compound just looking for Americans, they just wanted to find an American so they could catch one," he said. "WE STARTED SHOOTING AT THEM" "We started shooting at them, and then some other people also threw hand-made bombs over the fences and started the fires in the buildings," he said. "There was some Libyan security for the embassy outside but when the hand-made bombs went off they ran off and left." Hamam said he saw an American die in front of him in the mayhem that ensued. He said the body was covered in ash. The "Innocence of Muslims," the film blamed for provoking the violence, was the work of a California-based Israeli filmmaker Sam Bacile, according to a report by the Associated Press. It portrays Mohammad as a fool, a philanderer and a religious fake and in one clip posted on YouTube, he was shown in an apparent sexual act with a woman. For many Muslims it is blasphemous even to show a depiction of the Prophet. Bacile, who described himself to AP as an Israeli Jew, spoke to the agency from hiding on Tuesday. He said that the film, which cost $5 million to make, was intended as a political statement and was financed by more than 100 Jewish donors. Egypt's Coptic Orthodox Church, meanwhile, condemned Copts living abroad who it said had financed "the production of a film insulting the Prophet Mohammad". About a 10th of Egypt's 83 million people are Christian. Western countries denounced the Benghazi killings and Russia expressed deep concern, saying the episode underscored the need for global cooperation to fight "the evil of terrorism." Many Muslim states focused their condemnation on the film and will be concerned about preventing a repeat of the fallout seen after publication in a Danish newspaper of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad. This touched off riots in the Middle East, Africa and Asia in 2006 in which at least 50 people died. Afghan President Hamid Karzai called the making of the movie a "devilish act" but said he was certain those involved in its production were a very small minority. The U.S. embassy in Kabul appealed to Afghan leaders for help in "maintaining calm" and Afghanistan shut down the YouTube site so Afghans would not be able to see the film. General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, took the unusual step of telephoning a radical Florida Pastor, Terry Jones, and asking him to withdraw his support for the film. Earlier provocative acts by Jones, like publicly burning a Koran, had sparked Muslim unrest. In Egypt, Prime Minister Hisham Kandil called on Washington to act against the film's makers for stirring up strife but condemned the violence saying that they had "no relation to the (U.S.) government." "SMALL AND SAVAGE GROUP" U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the attack was the work of a "small and savage group." Abdel-Monem Al-Hurr, spokesman for Libya's Supreme Security Committee, said Libyan security forces came under heavy fire and "were not prepared for the intensity of the attack." Libya's interim government has struggled to impose its authority on a myriad of armed groups that refused to lay down their weapons and often take the law into their own hands. Security experts say the area around Benghazi is host to a number of Islamist militant groups who oppose any Western presence in Muslim countries. U.S. ambassadors in such volatile countries as Libya have tight security, usually travelling in well-protected convoys. Diplomatic missions are normally protected by Marines or other special forces. Tributes poured in to honor Stevens, who said in a video posted on the embassy website of his involvement in the Libyan revolution: "I was thrilled to watch the Libyan people stand up and demand their rights." Stevens, who was 52, grew up in California, graduated from Berkeley and worked in North Africa as a Peace Corps volunteer. He taught English in Morocco before joining the foreign service where he worked in the Middle East and North Africa. The worst-case scenario for Western governments is that the spate of recent unrest in Libya could be the start of an Iraq-style insurgency by Islamist militants. That could hit oil exports as the energy sector depends on foreign workers. However, security analysts say an insurgency is unlikely to gain the kind of traction it had in Iraq , mainly because Western states have no military presence in Libya. (Additional reporting by Samia Nakhoul in Beirut, Marie-Louise Gumuchian in Tripoli, Hadeel Al Shalchi in Tripoli, Sarah N. Lynch, Arshad Mohammed, Andrew Quinn, Matt Spetalnick, Steve Holland and Mark Hosenball in Washington, and Reuters reporters in Cairo and Benghazi; Writing by David Brunnstrom and Peter Millership) http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/12/us-libya-usa-attack-idUSBRE88B0EI20120912 Administration is engaged in a massive cover-up Benghazi explained: Interview with an "Intelligence Insider" - Doug Hagmann ( Bio and Archives ) Thursday, November 29, 2012 (47) Comments Print friendly Subscribe Email Us Benghazi, Libya CIA Station http://www.cryptocomb.org/Bengazi%20CIA%20Station.jpg Benghazi: Behind the scenes (Part II) This is part one of a multi-part interview with a government insider intimately familiar with the events that took place in Benghazi. In this part, he provides important background, and explains this administration is engaged in a massive cover-up. DH: It's been a while since we've discussed Benghazi. What have you heard lately? II: Before I answer that, I want to get a few things off my chest. Every politician, whether it's a congressman senator, diplomat, or their spokespeople and the media are lying to the American public every time they call the location of the attack a consulate. It was not. There was absolutely no diplomatic consulate in Benghazi. None. Words are important here. They can create a wrong image, an incorrect picture of what was really going on. The property where our Ambassador and other Americans were murdered was a rented villa consisting of a primary residence with a couple of outbuildings behind the actual house. The reason they're still calling it a consulate is to subtly divert any questions about our activities there. DH: Let's go over this again; exactly what was taking place at Benghazi? II: As I said, the place where the attack happened is one of the largest, one of the most active CIA operation centers in North Africa, if not in the entire Middle East. It was not a diplomatic station. It was a planning and operations center, a logistics hub for weapons and arms being funneled out of Libya. Unlike the embassy in Tripoli, there was limited security in Benghazi. Why? So the operation did not draw attention to what was going on there. DH: So in reality there were no actual security issues? II: Oh yes, there were, in Tripoli. Diplomatic cables show that. But it was for the embassy in Tripoli, the Ambassador and the diplomatic staff in general, not specifically for the Benghazi location for two reasons. First, the Benghazi location was a CIA operation, not a diplomatic one. Visible security at that location would draw unwanted attention there. They had to blend in. Remember, the villa was located in a somewhat residential area, sort of like the suburbs. Secondly, additional manpower was not needed there, at this CIA center, as the operation was already winding down. DH: I know you've gone over this before, but let's get into the specifics of the operation at Benghazi. II: Good, I want to be clear. After Gaddafi was taken out, there was the matter of his weapons and arms that were hidden all over Libya, including chemical weapons - gas weapons. According to Obama and Hillary Clinton, we were in Libya to collect and destroy these weapons to make for a 'safer' Libya. That's what they were telling the American public. That's not really what was going on, though, and it seems like all of the other nations except the average American knew it. Anyway, you can find pictures and videos of weapons caches being destroyed, but that is strictly for the public's consumption. What was really happening, before Gaddafi's body was even cold, is that we had people locating caches of weapons, separating the working from those that weren't, and making a big show of destroying the weapons, but only the weapons that were useless. The working weapons were being given to Islamic terrorists. They were being funneled through Libya, crisscrossing Libya on a Muslim Brotherhood managed strategic supply route. In fact, Michael Reagan called it the modern day equivalent of the Ho Chi Minh Trail in a recent article he wrote, and he is correct. The entire arms and weapons running operation was headquartered in Benghazi, The weapons were actually being shipped out of Libya from the port city of Dernah, located about a hundred miles east of Benghazi. That was the 'choke point' of the weapons being shipped out. Remember the Lusitania? Think in those terms, ships carrying weapons hid among 'humanitarian aid.' By the time of the attacks, an estimated 30-40 million pounds of arms were already transported out of Libya. From there, the weapons were being sent to staging areas in Turkey near the Syrian border, for use by the Free Syrian Army and other ragtag terrorist groups to fight against Assad. The objective was and still is to destabilize the Assad government. Why Syria, why not Iran? II: It's both, but Syria is the primary target here for this operation. First, look at the bigger picture, look at the so-called "Arab Spring." Who benefits and by default, who doesn't? Who is the architect for what's going on throughout the Middle East and North Africa? Whose agenda is being implemented? To specifically address Benghazi, though, look at the bigger picture here and what is trying to be accomplished. The Obama administration is playing the role of Saudi Arabia's private army. I think if Americans knew this, they would be outraged. Our service men and women are being sold out as mercenaries for the wants and desires of the Royal family, for the Saudi's interests. It's about religious dominance and oil. Who is really benefitting from, say, what's going on in Egypt? Mubarek is out, and the Muslim Brotherhood is in. Who does that benefit? Saudi Arabia. Look at what we see happening in Egypt. Destabilization. Do you think the Russians want that? Hell no. Syria is Russia's red line in the sand, as you earlier wrote. If Syria is lost to the Muslim Brotherhood by the actions of Obama, Hillary Clinton and others in this administration, what happens? Well, it will have an adverse impact on Russia from a military standpoint. They will likely lose access to their Mediterranean deep water port in Syria, which is Tartus. But think further - three dimensionally. Russia is still the world's largest oil producer, and that's Russia's primary source of income. Then there's Turkey, adjacent to Syria. A large amount of Russian oil and gas, consumed by the West, flows through Turkey, which is also a player in this operation. So, the destabilization of Syria which is exactly what Obama and Clinton are trying to do, presents a direct military and economic threat to Russia. Assad at least has kept things in check in Syria. Can you imagine Assad being replaced by someone like Morsi? That would strike at the very heart of Russia's economic health and military capabilities. Think of what's at stake here. Do Americans want a regional war? World War III? Has Obama or Clinton asked the American people if this is what they want? Make no mistake, we are doing the bidding for Saudi Arabia. The U.S., NATO and other allies are engaged in a proxy war with Iran and Russia. What about Assad's war crimes? Assad is no angel, but don't be fooled by the death toll attributed to him. Now this is important. Remember the first Gulf War? In the run up to Desert Storm, a young woman testified before the Human Rights Caucus - she only testified under her first name, which was Nayirah. Remember that she testified that Iraqi soldiers were taking infants from incubators in Kuwait, leaving them to die? Her testimony was supposedly confirmed by Amnesty International. Her testimony went viral, and every war hawk in the U.S. government cited her testimony, saying we needed to right the wrongs, the inhumanity. It was all one big lie! After Desert Storm, it was revealed that Nayirah's last name was Al-Sabah, and she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. Her testimony was part of a publicity campaign organized by Citizens for a Free Kuwait, which was run by Hill & Knowlton, a PR firm out of New York. People must learn the back story. So we see a body count attributed to Assad. Who's doing the killing, Assad's people? Maybe at times, but the Free Syrian Army and other groups are doing most of the slaughter. It's one huge 'false flag' operation and the media is selling it hard. And Americans are buying it, just like the testimony of the girl from Kuwait. It's one big lie being told by Obama, Clinton, Rice, and others. Many Americans are buying the lie, and the media is selling the lie. The people behind this are laughing at us. Don't you get it? They're laughing at us. And do you want to know what's at stake? Four Americans were killed in Benghazi. Forty thousand have been killed so far in Syria. Tens of thousands of Syrian people have become refugees. Why? For what? To advance the agenda of Saudi Arabia. For oil. You know, the so-called right wing establishment were all up in arms about Obama's submissive bow to the Saudi King. Where are they now? Where's the outrage that the body count will be much greater than Forty thousand? It is anticipated that if the Obama plan succeeds, not only will America be committed to yet another war, but the body count could be as high as FOUR MILLION . Christians, among others, will be slaughtered. This could trigger a third world war, it's that serious. What are Russia and Iran doing? Certainly, they must be fighting back. Benghazi was a strike against us, the Obama-Clinton agenda. A visible strike, and I'll explain more about this shortly, because there are events I will point out that will put it all into perspective. But think of it this way. How did we successfully collapse the Soviet Union? I mean, what was the last straw? We attacked their currency - the Ruble. They're still stinging from that, and Putin was in the KGB at the time. Do you think he forgot about that? So, how do, or will Russia and Iran strike back if Obama and Clinton continue this insanity? Militarily? Possibly in regional conflicts, but to take us out, to stop us, what is the one area where we are very vulnerable? It's our economy - our dollar. What's our dollar tied to? Not gold or silver anymore, and some say it's not tied to anything. Well, that's not quite correct. It's tied to OIL. The free-flow of oil. Oil transactions everywhere in the world, including Russia and China, are made with U.S. dollars. We buy their oil with our dollars, and they return with those same paper dollars and employ Americans by buying our goods and services. As Michael Reagan wrote : " his system is also crucial to the security of our diplomatic and legal infrastructure, which is ultimately backed by our military. It's the core of our foreign policy." He also wrote that "any attack on the free flow of oil is an attack on the dollar. Any attack on the dollar is an attack on our ability to project power and protect Western democracies, economies, and ideals. God have mercy on us all if that attack is successful!" Tomorrow Part II Copyright (c) Douglas Hagmann Douglas J. Hagmann and his son, Joe Hagmann host The Hagmann & Hagmann Report , a live Internet radio program broadcast each weeknight from 8:00-10:00 p.m. ET. Douglas Hagmann, founder & director of the Northeast Intelligence Network , and a multi-state licensed private investigative agency. Doug began using his investigative skills and training to fight terrorism and increase public awareness through his website. Doug can be reached at: director@homelandsecurityus.com Older articles by Doug Hagmann http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51346 Obama does not want the American people to know the truth about what is going on, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, AQIM Benghazi: Behind the scenes (Part II) - Doug Hagmann ( Bio and Archives ) Friday, November 30, 2012 (44) Comments Print friendly Subscribe Email Us Author's note: This is part two of a multi-part interview with a government insider intimately familiar with the events that took place in Benghazi. It is important to note that the information contained in this series was developed from interviews that spanned over 100 hours. In this part, the insider provides information about the events of the attack and the continuation of the cover-up at the highest levels of our government. ( For Part I, please click here ). We've heard different accounts and different timelines concerning the attack at Benghazi. What exactly happened? First, people must understand that the compound that was attacked was situated in a somewhat rural area and was not a consulate, but a rented villa, or a residential structure. The residence was the primary building, and what has been referred to as the annex was located about 1800 feet away as the crow flies, but just over a mile to travel by road. And again, visible security was not present as the compound was the headquarters for a covert operation. No one wanted to draw attention to what was taking place at this location. The first indications of problems there began at least twelve-(12) hours before the first shot was even fired. One of the men at the compound observed a policeman or Libyan security officer taking photographs outside of the villa. Keep in mind that Ambassador Stevens, the point man in this Obama-sanctioned weapons running operation, was hastily scheduled to meet with the Turkish consul general at this location. The meeting was deliberately planned for dinner tie, toward evening, when the events that happened next could be performed under the cover of darkness. It's also important to consider the location of this meeting. Tripoli is the seat of power in Libya, and a genuine diplomatic meeting could more safely have been conducted there, at the embassy. Also, what most people don't know is that Libya is split, much like East and West Germany before the wall. The eastern part is more closely aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood, the same group that controls Egypt. The Turkish consul general had to meet there, not just with Stevens but with other factions involved in this covert operation. Now I'll digress for a moment. It is reasonable to ask whether the Turkish consul general was setting Stevens up for a hit, like a classic mob-style hit. First, there is no dispute that there was surveillance done at 6:30 a.m. and intermittently throughout the day. Next, consider that three hours before the first shot was fired, about 6:30 p.m. local time, some strange things were observed taking place near the compound. Military type vehicles began closing of the streets with trucks that had 50 caliber guns mounted on them. Checkpoints on the streets and at intersections were being quietly closed off around the compound. Nearby residents began going inside their homes. Anyone walking in the area got off the streets, like a scene from a movie in the Godfather series. It was obvious that the stage was being set for a strike against the compound. This alone reveals preplanning and coordination. It's also noteworthy to point out that the Turkish counsel general most likely passed through one or more of these checkpoints, or at least would have noticed that things were not right in the area. You must remember that just as Stevens was previously CIA working under diplomatic cover, the Turkish counsel general was his counterpart. It's typical spy-versus-spy stuff. Also consider this. One of the men stationed at the compound, a British national, left the compound at about 9:20 p.m., reportedly to get more phone cards. That's right, phone cards, like you would buy at Walmart. Why? Because the men at the compound ran out of minutes. Just who do you think they were talking to that day to burn through the minutes, and why do you think they needed them at that exact time? They were using the phones as a last and perhaps only line of communications to provide assessments of the strange things going on earlier. They knew that something was being planned and they were conveying that information - their observations to those who could assist them, in Tripoli and DC. Based on these activities, it is clear that the men at the compound suspected that they were in trouble long before the first shot was ever fired. They were calling anyone who would listen, or who should have listened. We knew trouble was brewing and no one responded in any meaningful way. Could the man who left to buy more phone cards have known what was about to take place? Well, it's possible, but there is no indication of that. Was the Turkish counsel general in on this, to set Stevens up? Well, what have we heard from our government? Has anyone even bothered to interview him? What did he say? Don't forget, this administration decided to handle this attack as a crime and not a terrorist attack. How long did it take for the FBI to be able to access the 'crime scene' after the attack? More importantly, what was left at the 'crime scene' to examine by the FBI due to this delay? Do you think the delay was accidental? Do you know what was discussed, or the reason for the meeting between Stevens and the Turkish consul general? Yes, I know some key points. First, keep in mind what this arms running operation was all about. It was to topple Assad and replace him with a Muslim Brotherhood leader. It was to destabilize Syria to advance the agenda of Saudi Arabia. They were using U.S. and NATO forces to do exactly that. However, Assad is no Gaddafi, and there is no comparison between Assad's army and the Libyan army. It would take much more than rebels inside Syria to topple Assad. There is no way on earth that the Syrian rebels, or Free Syrian Army, has the capability to accomplish this objective alone. It required U.S. assistance, arms and training. Now, Turkey is a NATO ally. They were assisting the Obama-Clinton-Saudi plan to funnel weapons ultimately to Syria, but the primary staging areas for these weapons were in Turkey near the Syrian border. Visual surveillance by Russia, using satellites and other means amassed photographic documentation of the U.S. assisting the 'anti-Assad rebels' inside Turkey. They developed evidence of the U.S. training these rebels and assisting them into Syria to fight against Assad. Think about this. What if surveillance images observed anti-Assad rebels being trained to handle and mount chemical weapons - gas shells - onto rockets? The process would be apparent and would obviously be detected by a number of visual indicators. Obviously, Syria wanted this to stop. By extension, so did Russia. One aspect of the weapons plan was to set up a false flag operation to make it appear that Assad used chemical weapons against his own people. Imagine the outcry from the civilized world to the news that Assad 'gassed' his own people. That would be an invitation to NATO and the West to openly intervene. Don't forget about the timing of all of this. Two months before the elections, and time was running out. The job of taking out Assad was not yet complete. Such an event would quickly advance this agenda. By this time, however, being caught and placed in a rather unenviable position between Russia and the U.S., the Turkish consul general was in a 'CYA, clean-up' mode, assuring that none of the chemical weapons that might have still been in Libya were headed for Turkey. It is also important to understand that the covert weapons running operation was just about finished. An estimated 40 million pounds of weapons were already shipped from Libya, and things were winding down. There was another issue as well, a very important and telling one. Seven members of the Iranian Red Crescent had been kidnapped or snatched from the streets of Benghazi on or about July 31, 2012. Again you must understand that virtually anyone walking on the streets of Benghazi not indigenous to the area are spies. Covert operatives, operating under various covers. From all nations. Along with the message that the weapons running operation was compromised, the Iranians had good reason to suspect that the 'Red Crescent workers' were snatched by the CIA or with their assistance. Iran wanted them back. They were spies, and countries want their spies back! So part of the meeting was to address this, as there was pressure by Russia against a wavering Turkey to switch sides. Anyway, you'll see how this ties in to the way the actual attack was executed. Please continue. So at 9:30 pm local time, the compound began to take on small arms fire. Based on all reports I've reviewed, there were three twelve-man attack teams armed with small arms, RPGs, and other sophisticated military style weapons. These were not run-of-the-mill street weapons, but military issued type weapons. The types of weapons alone scream that this was a preplanned attack. Eyes on the area confirmed that two of these teams surrounded the villa and the annex. The third team was elsewhere, lying in wait. The two teams began their assault on the compound where Stevens was inside about an hour after the Turkish counsel general left. Remember, he had to pass the checkpoints after the meeting. Just keep that in mind. Anyway, we all know now that there was an intense firefight that lasted nearly nine hours during which four Americans, Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Dougherty and Tyrone Woods were killed. And of course that attack was not over a video and there were no protests before the attack. Now there are questions that are not being asked. The two well-armed 'hit teams' had the capability to reduce the compound and annex to rubble quickly. Why a protracted firefight? There are a couple of reasons. First, what was the makeup of the 'hit teams,' or who were the attackers? We have verified that the attackers were a combination of members of Ansar al Sharia and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), but they were operating under the flag of Ansar al Sharia. Who is Ansar al Sharia? Iranian terrorists. They are a terrorist group that receives their training by and funding from Iran . Now think about this. Carefully consider the implications here. IRAN. It's the elephant in the room no one wants to mention or talk about. The attack on our ambassador and our people - Americans - was an attack by Iran. It was an attack at a nation-state level. AQIM also assisted. They are indigenous to Africa and are extremely dangerous. AQIM is a very 'elite' and extremely well-funded group, and very limited in number. Our last assessment suggests that there are only 400 or so members, but they are very influential across Africa and into South and Central America and Western Europe. Their importance and relevance will become evident shortly. The reason that they did not just take out the compound and everything and everyone in it is that they were looking for their spies. Remember the Red Crescent workers? The Iranian spies? They suspected that they might be held at the annex. As such, they wanted to free them and did not want to risk killing them. Oh, and there were others 'missing' as well. AQIM members. These were terrorists involved in drug running operations from the Tri-border (TBA) areas of South America through North Africa and into Western Europe. By the way, this is the way they made their money. Drugs sell at higher profits in Western Europe than elsewhere, so there is money to be made. The problem is that some of them got caught-snatched up in Benghazi and northeastern Libya. Now regarding AQIM, this has a direct connection not only to South America, but also to Mexico and Mexican drug gangs. You think that what's going on in Libya is just 'over there,' and far away from the U.S. and has nothing to do with our safety and security? Think again, but more on this in a bit. There's also another reason. The hit teams fully expected rescue teams from the U.S. to be dispatched to the compound. Certainly, calls for help went out. By waiting for the back-up or rescue forces, a surprise assault by the other 'hit team' team would have exposed our forces to possible causalities and turned the event into a much bigger event where the actual nature of the operation could be exposed to the world. Instead of being a cover-up for which they have yet to be held accountable, it would have been an international incident that would have exposed the entire affair. So the Ansar al Sharia attack groups deliberately conducted a protracted assault on the compound. Just imagine, our men and even the bad guys never expected team Obama would leave our people twisting in the wind, fighting for their lives. That alone should speak volumes to every American. As daylight approached, they had to wrap things up so they could disappear under the cover of darkness. Oh, and the crowds that are often cited by this administration, did form in the area as the attack progressed, much like a growing mob in riot. They provided the fog, or the cover, that permitted the attackers to escape amid the crowd. You mentioned the missing Iranian Red Crescent workers and members of AQIM. Were they ever released or found? Yes, and this is an extremely important part of this entire story. This reaches into the highest levels of our government. This is so very important that it must be addressed separately. So the attack was first and the crowd came later. I noted that the administration said that there were protests going on at the Embassy in Cairo at the same time and they compared it to Benghazi. Yes, that's their cover story and they know that there is absolutely no comparison. This is one huge lie that is easily addressed and put out of its misery. How soon did U.S. intelligence officials know who was responsible for the attack? Almost immediately, if not concurrent with the attack. Every part of that area is under active aerial surveillance by the U.S. There was SIGINT or communication intercepts at the time of the attack. Then, there was even an admission by the attackers. Obama knew. Hillary knew. Clapper knew. Everyone knew, expect the American people. And you know what? The American media knew as well. I heard a statement that they did not admit knowledge to avoid alerting the perpetrators. Yes, it was said that Rice and others did not want to alert the 'bad guys' or tip their hand or some such nonsense, but did that mean that Susan Rice, for example, had to appear on national television and lie to every one of us, to the country? In my opinion, Rice took on the temporary job of propaganda minister for a day in exchange for a shot at Secretary of State in the future. You are painting quite a dire picture. It gets worse, much worse, and it involves real threats across the globe and even to us here in the United States. But it's all because of our actions, the covert weapons running from Libya to Syria by way of Turkey at the direction of Barack Obama and his Saudi 'handlers.' FORTY THOUSAND men, women and children are dead in Syria as a direct result of this attempt at nation building, or tearing down Assad. There are four dead Americans. We are arming some of the very people who are killing our troops. Not only are we on the wrong side of this, we are actively pushing the world to the precipice of World War III. We are engaged in a real war here with Iran and Syria and by extension, with Russia and China. And we are being lied to about it every step of the way. And the lies are getting worse, but so are the attempts to stop the truth from getting out. What do you mean? What do you think the recent directive issued by Obama, the one you wrote about ' insider threats ,' is all about? Obama does not want the American people to know the truth about what is going on. He's doubled down to stop leaks, like this. But you know what? He just might be too late, because we're not done here. I'm not done talking, and there's much more that needs to be exposed. Copyright (c) Douglas Hagmann Douglas J. Hagmann and his son, Joe Hagmann host The Hagmann & Hagmann Report , a live Internet radio program broadcast each weeknight from 8:00-10:00 p.m. ET. Douglas Hagmann, founder & director of the Northeast Intelligence Network , and a multi-state licensed private investigative agency. Doug began using his investigative skills and training to fight terrorism and increase public awareness through his website. Doug can be reached at: director@homelandsecurityus.com Older articles by Doug Hagmann http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51400 Advancing the agenda of Saudi Arabia, the Muslim Brotherhood in North Africa, Middle East. We're doing their work, pitting ourselves against Syria, Iran and ultimately Russia and China Benghazi explained: Interview with an "Intelligence Insider" (Part III) - Doug Hagmann ( Bio and Archives ) Wednesday, December 12, 2012 (28) Comments Print friendly Subscribe Email Us Author's note: This is part three of a multi-part interview with a government insider intimately familiar with the events that took place in Benghazi. As previously stated, the information contained in this series was developed from interviews that spanned over 100 hours. Included in this update is the most current information following a more recent interview with this insider. (Click here for Part I and Part II ). Events seem to be changing rapidly in Syria, and we know that the operations in Benghazi played a very important role in Syria. Please update the readers on the current situation, but first give a brief recap for context. Okay, but we're running out of time. The world is running out of time. Remember when we first began this lengthy interview process? It was in response to your report on September 15, 2012, just four days after the attack in Libya. You wrote that the fuse for WW III has been lit. It is now burning rapidly down, although people are still not understanding what's taking place right in front of them. I'll give a brief, perhaps somewhat oversimplified recap going back to the beginning, giving context for what's taking place at this very moment. I suppose I cannot overstate this or say this enough. The so-called "Arab Spring" is an initiative by Obama and his foreign policy advisers, Clinton, in her capacity of Secretary of State, and others including some of the most powerful people in the world. International bankers, the power brokers and string pullers. It is a plan to reshape the Middle East and North Africa, and change the geopolitical balance of power. It's not about some feel-good mission to free the oppressed. Never was. It's about the U.S., through the CIA, using groups ideologically aligned to al Qaeda aligned to overthrow various Middle East nations to install regimes controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood It's a globalist agenda, using the blueprints and agenda created by Saudi Arabia for the North African and Middle East portions of the globe, to shape that area geopolitically. They are using the United States as their surrogate and their military muscle, and the Obama led U.S. "regime" is all too willing to comply. With regard to Libya, it was in March of 2011 when the Clinton State Department, under orders of Obama, appointed Ambassador Stevens as the point man to the al Qaeda linked Libyan opposition forces to topple Qaddafi. Remember, Osama bin Laden was reportedly killed two months later and al Qaeda was supposedly out of existence, according to Obama. But think about this. Under direct orders of Obama, Clinton appointed Stevens to work with the very same people who reportedly killed 3000-plus Americans on September 11, 2001 for the purposes of overthrowing Qaddafi. It worked, and Qaddafi was deposed and murdered in October of 2011. Look at what happened next. Clinton announced that the U.S. was throwing $40 million into Libya to "secure" Qaddafi's weapon arsenals. Oh, really? That's what was being told to the public and to congress, but it's not reality, certainly not from the inside. As I've already explained , that money and our personnel were being used to collect the weapons to send them to Syria to topple Assad. Before getting to Syria, they were placed in staging areas in Turkey near the Syrian border, and other places, including Jordan. They were being collected and sent through northern Libya, and the CIA operations center was the headquarters for this operation. As I've said many times, there was no embassy or consulate in Benghazi. It was a covert CIA operations center. Wait, why do people continue to call it a consulate? Why is it identified on Google maps as a consulate. First, it continues to be called a consulate because this is part of the cover-up. The government is STILL lying to the American people. The media is assisting in the cover-up, and so are some in congress in both parties. For goodness sakes, anyone looking at Google maps on September 10, 2012 will never find the Benghazi location named a consulate. It's a LIE! Sorry, please go on. So every American understands, it is OUR tax money in part that was used to arm Islamic groups ideologically aligned with al Qaeda. Imagine that. Eleven years after 9/11, we're funding and assisting the very same terrorists who attacked our country to topple another country. And other countries are in this up to their necks as well. The Brits for one. The very country or empire that created some of the post-war borders, many knowingly unmanageable from the outset, is now in part responsible for changing them. Anyway, the weapons everyone in government said that were "collected" and destroyed were pieces of junk that never worked. The working weapons, including an estimated 10-15,000 shoulder fired missiles were shipped out of Libya. Stevens was the head of logistics, coordinating this operation. He was working with the Turkish consul general as well, the guy who met with him on the night of his death. We already went over this in detail. The attack was perpetuated by Ansar al-Shariah, an Islamic terrorist group backed by Iran. Also present were members of the terror group AQIM, or al Qaeda in Northern Africa. It was a coordinated attack for a purpose, and never, ever had anythig remotely to do with any internet video. Please touch on the nature of the attack again for those just catching up As I explained before , I have information that three "hit teams" were dispatched to Benghazi . Stevens was lured to the CIA compound to talk about Russia's knowledge of what the U.S. was doing - running weapons to be used against Assad in Syria, which is Russia's "red line." They needed to talk and not at the embassy, but at this out of the way location. The weapons running operation, although it was winding down anyway, was compromised. Over. Done. It is likely that the Turkish consul general told Sevens that the Russians had evidence - proof, of weapons in Turkey, including chemical weapons. Turkey, a NATO ally being squeezed by Russia, wanted the weapons gone from their turf. We also had people up there training the "rebels" on how to use the weapons as well. You heard about training exercises in that area on or about September 11, 2012? Who do you think we were training? Right after the Turkish counsel general left, the attack against the CIA compound began. What was the reason for the attack? Remember the story of the Iranian Red Crescent workers being "snatched" from the streets of Benghazi late on July 31 or the early morning of August 1, 2012? This happened at the same time the CIA compound wall was hit by a mortar. These Red Crescent workers were spies. At the same time, some members of the terror group AQIM were also picked up in Benghazi. It was a mystery! Where did they go? Who had them? The belief was that they were being held at the CIA compound. Iran wanted them back. So, in addition to everything else, Ansar al Shariah was looking for their people. AQIM were looking for their people too. This is the reason the compound was not immediately leveled by the weapons they had on sight. They were trying to find and free their people, who were not being held there, but elsewhere. They were trying to 'smoke" the people out of the compound and rescue the "hostages." Plus, a message had to be sent to Obama, Clinton and others that the weapons operation had to stop. The groups leading the attack, primarily Ansar al Sharia with an AQIM presence as well, were tools of Iran, Syria and of course, Russia. So there were two reasons for the attack: get their spies back, and expose this operation for what it was. Again, we went over this. The snatched Red Crescent Workers play prominently into exposing this operation. Yes, and here is where it gets interesting. They were released exactly 65 days after they were snatched . They were in good health and dropped off on the streets of Tripoli. But why then? This is where it get's damning to Obama, Clinton, and Valerie Jarrett. What is not widely known to Americans is that Obama sent Iranian born Valerie Jarrett to Qatar for high level talks with the Iranians about coming to an agreement before the November elections. This, despite Jarrett not having the capacity as official of the U.S. government. She had no business doing what she was doing. That aside, the plan was that Jarrett would broker a deal, and Obama would announce to the world that he had succeeded in diplomatic negotiations with the Iranians where they would halt their nuclear weapons ambitions and Obama would officially live up to his title as savior of the world. But before the talks kicked into high gear, the Iranians told Jarrett that the Red Crescent workers had to be released before any talks could be done in earnest. Jarrett relayed that to Obama and Clinton, and then, out of nowhere, the missing workers were suddenly released. If there were talks and the "spies" were released, then why was there no agreement? Because Jarrett, Obama and Clinton were being played by the Iranians. It was to buy time, especially since the Obama agenda of arming the anti-Assad rebels was continuing. The Iranians are not stupid. They understood that Obama and Clinton were continuing to support the anti-Assad rebels, and with bipartisan support, STILL ARE! So now we are hearing reports of chemical weapons planned for use by Assad. What's the real story? The world is being set up for a false flag operation. Obama, Clinton and every supporter of the anti-Assad initiative are either lying to the American people or are "dupes." The objective remains taking out Assad and replacing him with a Muslim Brotherhood-backed regime. There have been reports out of the U.S. and the UK that Assad is preparing to use chemical weapons against the rebels. Assad denies that he would ever use them, and there is a reason we should believe him in this case. The condemnation that would result is unnecessary and certainly unwarranted. There reports are to condition people to immediately suspect Assad when a chemical incident occurs. In this case, it's the U.S., the UK and other Western backed countries constantly asserting that Assad will launch a chemical attack, and we're getting ready just for that case. But if you look at the evidence, it's the anti-Assad, Western backed forces that have taken possession of chemical storage areas. There was a recently released video, very graphic in nature of anti-Assad rebels conducting the test of a nerve agent on two rabbits. The video displayed chemicals bottles with the name of a Turkish country on them. I'm not going to give the name or video channel, but people can find the video for themselves on YouTube. It's a set-up to topple Assad and put a Muslim brotherhood leader in his place. I told you before, and you printed what I said, that a chemical weapon attack would justify U.S. and NATO intervention, supported by the outcry of the world against Assad. It's Iraq all over again, except Syria is a hundred times more dangerous. Unlike Iraq, Afghanistan or even Libya, Syria will not implode. It will EXPLODE, and we will be fighting Iranians as well. Russia has "advisers" in Syria as well. Are the American people ready and willing to square off against Iran AND Russia in a regional conflict that will likely turn into a global, full scale war? What's going on with Turkey, Syria and Russia now? It was announced that Turkey will receive patriot Missiles to protect them from the spillover. Actually, these missiles over the northern territory of Syria will create a de-facto no fly zone that will allow the consolidation of anti-Assad rebels to perhaps install a new Western-backed government in the northern part of Syria . Well, Russia deployed Iskander missiles into Syria, rendering the Patriot missiles ineffective. This move shows exactly how serious Russia is. They are not backing down. And you know what else? Sunburn missiles are at Iran's disposal and can be used in that theater. Regardless of what is written or talked about by talking heads, these missiles poses a grave threat to our aircraft carriers. Want to see how fast we can lose an aircraft carrier and the several thousand crew members on board? This is what we face. Russia is doubling down, Iran is doubling down. Assad is doubling down. Meanwhile, Obama and the U.S. State Department continue to lie to the American people. The lie continues, and the fuse to WW III is burning down while the Obama regime is heading full steam ahead toward regional and global war. Why haven't we heard any truth about Benghazi, even from congressional investigators? Because the lie continues, and we are still supporting the overthrow of Assad, despite Putin's warnings. Obama, Clinton, the global leaders and their financiers are continuing to lead us into World War III. The lies continue, and to continue operations, the truth must be kept from the American public. We are continuing our operations to overthrow Assad at full throttle right in front of all Americans. And there will be fallout. In addition to four dead Americans and over 40 thousand dead Syrians, the consequences of our actions will cause the death of an estimated FOUR MILLION in Syria alone, many Christians. When, not if the "conflict" escalates, we'll see many millions dead. And for what? Okay, what's the objective here? Behind the smoke and mirrors is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. It's their agenda. We're just providing the army, the training, performing the logistics and doing the heavy lifting. It's the Saudi agenda, and it's about power, control and oil. Who do you think controls the Muslim brotherhood? Has anyone asked why Obama, raised in a Muslim culture, is tied at the hip with the Muslim Brotherhood? Why aren't Americans angry that we are using our assets, our men and women to advance the agenda of Saudi Arabia under the orders of Barack Hussein Obama? Why are members of congress so quick to commit our forces to oust Assad when it benefits Saudi Arabia, not the U.S? The agenda of Obama is so overt, so "in your face" yet not one member of congress, not one media outlet is calling him out on this. Some might call this mere conspiracy theory. There's a conspiracy alright, but it involves the government and the media. They are laughing in our faces. In addition to the obvious regional consequences, there will be blowback from the Obama-Clinton agenda. What type of blowback? Well, let's first look at what's happened already as this insane Obama agenda has been going on for some time. Remember the plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the U.S? On October 11, 2011, the FBI announced that a plot, identified by the FBI as "Operation Red Coalition," was foiled to kill Saudi ambassador Adel al-Jubeir in the United States. It was alleged that Iranian nationals were working with a Mexican drug gang to kill al-Jubeir with a bomb while he was dining at a DC restaurant. Do you think he would have been the only one to die there if that plan succeeded? No, innocent men, women and children would have died as well. Many in the media and the talking heads were having trouble understanding why Iran or Iranian nationals would want the Saudi Ambassador dead. Well, in the context of what you know now, does this make a bit more sense? These events do not happen in a vacuum. But I'm sure people will question why members of a Mexican drug cartel would be enlisted to assist in this operation? This gets a bit complex, but it goes back to AQIM. Remember them? That's al Qaeda in Northern Africa. They are an elite Muslim terror group of perhaps 400 or so members. They carefully screen their members, and do a lot of subcontracting. Despite being Muslim, they are running drugs from South America, specifically the Tri-Border Area (TBA) into North Africa for ultimate distribution into Europe. Why Europe instead of North America? Because the drugs are worth more there, and the profit difference is worth it. While drugs are being funneled from South America, terror groups are also funneling al Qaeda terrorists or terrorists of similar ideology into South America and into Mexico, where they are entering the United States. Think of it as a two-lane highway. Some of these terrorists have been caught at the southern border of the U.S., some with tattoos on their arms of mullahs and Islamic phrases of jihad. Why? Because when the Syria-Iran situation goes hot, there will be terrorists already inside the United States. But we created them and gave them the reason to be here. A few AQIM members, running the drugs east, were caught in Benghazi, which explains their presence and getting picked up there as well. So Ansar al Shariah and AQIM, both present at Benghazi, were looking for their people. But back to the blowback, or the consequences of the Obama foreign policy agenda. There is more, and it much more serious. Attacks in the U.S? For all intents and purposes, the United States, Russia and China are at war. Although the situation in Syria is being described as a civil war, it is the direct result of U.S. involvement by Obama and Clinton at the behest of Saudi Arabia. While real bullets are flying in Syria, an asymmetrical war exists beyond the confines of Syria's borders. Remember, Putin has drawn a hard line in the sand at Syria. The stability of Syria is of extreme strategic economic and military importance to Russia as well as China. Although no hot war exists between Russia, China and the U.S. at the moment, that does not mean things are not taking place behind the scenes in ways that are not readily apparent. One of the biggest threats to the United States right now is an attack on the U.S. Dollar. At this moment, the fate of the U.S. dollar hangs in the balance. What is the U.S. dollar backed by? Gold? Silver? Neither. Some say the dollar is not backed by anything, and although they might be technically accurate, it's not entirely true. At this moment, the dollar is backed by one important thing, which is oil. The stability of the dollar rests on the free and unimpeded flow of oil. Once that is interrupted or even threatened, there is a high degree of risk that the dollar will collapse. The "string pullers" are pulling us into a situation where our actions result in the disruption or the threat of disruption of the free flow of oil. Given the current state of our economy, how fast might this bring down the United States without a shot having to be fired? Now I know I'm stepping out into some areas that people might consider to be fringe, but think about what is taking place in the U.S. and across the globe. People talk about global governance, or a one order under a single currency. What's the quickest way to destroy a country from within? What was the major reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union? Remember the Ruble? I can tell you this, Putin does. So at this point, what's an expeditious way to strike at the very heart of America while also accomplishing other larger global objectives? Take out the U.S. dollar. We are in a period of heightened risk and maximum vulnerability, put here by Obama, his foreign policy advisers, czars, and of course Hillary Clinton. What are their objectives, and those of his closest advisers, especially in terms of the fate of the U.S? Fundamental change in ways that can be hardly imagined. Are you saying that the larger objective is to destroy America? I'm saying that we are advancing the agenda of Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood in North Africa and the Middle East. We're doing their work, pitting ourselves against Syria, Iran and ultimately Russia and China. Syria and Iran are firewalls for Russia and China. Russia and China understand the monster created and used by the United States, they understand the Muslim Brotherhood backed terrorists. They will not stop at Syria. They will continue to push into the Federation of Russian States, disrupt oil flow, overthrow nations and threaten the security and sovereignty of Russia and threaten China. We're playing with fire, and to expect no consequences is ridiculous. The path that Obama continues to take, without any objection from congress or others in the U.S., will lead us on a path to self destruction. Perhaps the ultimate question is whether it is by incompetence or by design. Copyright (c) Douglas Hagmann Douglas J. Hagmann and his son, Joe Hagmann host The Hagmann & Hagmann Report , a live Internet radio program broadcast each weeknight from 8:00-10:00 p.m. ET. Douglas Hagmann, founder & director of the Northeast Intelligence Network , and a multi-state licensed private investigative agency. Doug began using his investigative skills and training to fight terrorism and increase public awareness through his website. Doug can be reached at: director@homelandsecurityus.com Older articles by Doug Hagmann http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51679 Chaffetz: State Dept Hiding Benghazi Survivors by Kerry Picket 12 Dec 2012 667 post a comment Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R- UT) told Breitbart News on Wednesday that he has been "thwarted" by the State Department from seeing any Americans who survived the deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi. Many people forget that there were Americans who survived the Benghazi attack, some of whom were badly injured and are still recovering. "My understanding is that we still have some people in the hospital. I'd like to visit with them and wish them nothing but the best but the State Department has seen it unfit for me to know who those people are-or even how many there are," Rep. Chaffetz said. "I don't know who they are. I don't know where they live. I don't know what state they're from. I don't even know how many there are. It doesn't seem right to me." "This is so patently different than any other experience I've had. Unfortunately, people have been killed and maimed and in harm's way in Afghanistan and Iraq and in points beyond. It's typically been the case that they would release those names but in this case, they won't. My challenge is to the media. You try and figure it out. They won't let Congress know. They won't seem to let the media know either." Breitbart News sent an inquiry to the State Department regarding those who survived the attack in Benghazi and is awaiting a response. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/12/12/Chaffetz-Benghazi-State-Dept A Timeline of the Benghazi Attacks Reuters John Hudson 3,372 ViewsSep 21, 2012 While the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi has dominated headlines for more than a week, the facts of what actually happened during the Sept. 11 assault are still far from settled. A myriad of questions remain such as the identity of the attackers, the degree to which the assault was pre-planned and why security at the consulate was so insufficient, but new accounts bring us closer to how events unfolded that night and how U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other U.S. personnel were killed. To help sort it all out, this is a timeline of what we know so far about the attack, sequenced in Benghazi time. 8:00 to 9:30 p.m. This is the most disputed period of the evening. At 8 p.m., Ambassador Stevens finished a meeting with the Turkish consul general and, according to The Wall Street Journal , said he was "retiring for the night." What happened next has still not been established. Obama administration officials say that around 8 p.m.. a mob of Muslim protesters gathered around the U.S. consulate to protest the U.S. film Innocence of Muslims . Yesterday, however, CBS News reported that witnesses at the scene say there was never an anti-American protest outside the consulate. "That is in direct contradiction to the administration's account of the incident," said CBS correspondent Margaret Brennan. In today's paper, The New York Times also reported that witnesses say no anti-American protests occurred at the consulate: "Libyan witnesses, including two guards at the building, say the area around the compound was quiet until the attackers arrived." The map on the right shows a Google satellite image of the consulate. 9:30 p.m. The attackers arrive, approaching the consulate from three sides, armed with rocket-propelled grenades. According to The Journal , the militants breached the front and east walls around the building, and Americans began firing from inside. The Times says 20 Americans are inside at this time. The building was not heavily guarded and at no point were Marines involved in the fighting, despite initial reports. 9:35 to 10:30 p.m. The consulate alarm goes off and Libyan guards call for backup as militants gain access to the compound. "They fire rocket-propelled grenades into the main building. Mr. Stevens, Sean Smith and an American security officer are inside," reports The Times . "The security officer makes it outside. He returns to rescue the others and finds Mr. Smith dead but does not find Mr. Stevens." At 10 p.m., the consulate is burning in flames and, according to the Journal, the security officer was joined by Libyan government reinforcements who just arrived. "They guard front and rear gates as militants begin to crowd at rear gate. U.S. and Libyan guards enter burning building." The guards were also unable to find Ambassador Stevens. 10:45 p.m. At this point, American security personnel try to take back the main building of the consulate but fail. According to The Times they retreat to another compound about a half-mile away traveling in "two cars" according to The Journal. 12:30 a.m. Looters descend on the consulate and pull the ambassador out of the building. According to The Times , these same Libyans were responsible for bringing Stevens to the hospital. Video footage of Stevens being dragged out of the compound later surfaced online (most notably, the Drudge Report), with images of Libyans cheering and praising Allah. 1:00 a.m. A half hour later, Stevens arrives at Benghazi Medical Center and is described as "unresponsive," according to the Journal . The Times says "The doctor who treats him says he may have died from smoke inhalation. Americans are unaware of his whereabouts at this point." The map to the right shows the route from the consulate to the Benghazi Medical Center (5.1 kilometers by car.) 1:30 a.m. Enter the reinforcements: "An American rescue team arrives from Tripoli at Benghazi's airport and drives to the second compound," reports the Times . 2 a.m. This is where phase two of the attack is reported to have begun and where evidence emerges, according to some observers, that the attack was pre-planned and coordinated. "As the staff is preparing to leave the second compound, it comes under fire. More than 20 staff members retreat to a building at the back of the compound," reports the Times . Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, both American security officers, were killed in the shootout. Describing the confrontation, the Times says "The attackers had lain in wait, silently observing as the rescuers, including eight State Department civilians who had just landed at the airport in Benghazi, arrived in large convoys. This second attack was shorter in duration than the first, but more complex and sophisticated. It was an ambush." 3 to 4 a.m. Ambassador Stevens' body is found at the Benghazi hospital by Libyan security forces. After his colleague's describe his features, Libyans identify the body. 6:30 a.m. Time to leave. The U.S. survivors are flown to Tripoli. Shortly afterwards, the bodies of the murdered Americans are flown out of Benghazi as well. Want to add to this story? Let us know in comments or send an email to the author at jhudson@theatlantic.com. You can share ideas for stories on the Open Wire. John Hudson Topics: Afghanistan , Libya http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/09/timeline-benghazi-attacks/57124/ WHITE HOUSE INSIDER: "Barack Obama - The Butcher of Benghazi." by Ulsterman on September 20, 2012 with 102 Comments in News "But they are so spooked and confused over the polling data, they released it sooner. That means the Middle East situation has them afraid. People are actually asking some questions now. Sniffing around the situation just a bit. And if they get somebody in the military...somebody like that...to go on the record with this...with whatever had that ambassador acting so strangely right before he was killed...well-well-well..." -WHI NOTE: Readers should know - Insider has been extremely busy of late, and to be given even just a bit of time to sit down face to face again after months of being unable to do so is both unexpected and a welcome privilege. -UM UM: You said I get two main topics to discuss, so let's start with Fast and Furious. Holder. Where are we at and where will it go? Gone in the fall. That's what you promised. Many times. WHI: Yes I did - and I also said...was it last time we talked...also said it's out of our hands now. They got what they need to push him out...they can do it if they're willin' to get just a little bloody. Don't know if they will though. Some of them...some of the Republicans are willin' - that I know. But they ain't leadership. They can move a committee vote on somethin'...but they can't bring it to the floor all by themselves. And then you got the Senate blocking everything...not the Senate. Reid. What they got or what they promised that old motherf-cker...nothing gettin' by him. Read more in News << Obama Flip-Flops On Middle East Embassy Attacks - Now Admits It WAS A Terrorist Attack Against America GUNNERGATE: Obama White House IGNORED Inspector General Gunrunning Investigation >> UM: So it's Boehner? He's blocking taking this to the next level? WHI: Sure...among others. I don't want put all the blame on Boehner...he's seeing how even if the House were to put something strong...hell...they already done good on some of that, right? Even pushing a legal challenge. But that takes a lot of time...and none of that will ever see the light of day until after the election. Might make for a brutal second term for Obama if he wins...but as for real justice? The truth? They are runnin' out the clock. And yeah - Republicans are dragging their feet too. Scared of a fight. A real fight. (Pause) Thing that's got me...well...more than a little pissed off about this is the real potential behind the DOJ investigation. You see, Fast and Furious...the gunrunning bullsh*t. It ties into a whole pile of no good around Obama and Jarrett...there's political stuff there of course. Gun control and all that. None of that has really come out like it should. I promised that memo...said there was a memo on the gun control thing, remember that? Nobody said nothing about it - and then it came out. And I thought "here we go - now it starts". Then nothin'. Media buried it. Deep. Congress hardly touched it. UM: You're talking about the memo stating how the border violence can be used to implement stronger gun regulations? WHI: That's the one - tied directly to Fast and Furious - laid out the real intent of all that gunrunning. They wanted things to get f-cked up. They wanted those drug lords killing off each other and if some poor innocent bastards get blown away in the crossfire, all the better, right? Make Americans...make enough of them, hate the idea of guns. Make them willing to give some of those guns back. Make them...the Dems would need just another 10% or so of the voters, maybe not even that much...and gun rights in America would be transformed forever. Be lucky to get a water gun out there after they done with it. And I ain't talking exaggerations here. The Democrats - ones who control the party now...taking guns away is right at the top of their priorities list. Way up there. UM: Why is that? WHI: It all comes back to control with these people. Soviet Union style control. Where you live. What you eat. What you read. How you work. They want to control all of that. 'Course they go on living however they like. Government becomes the elite class. And we ain't far off from that already. Obama, Jarrett...they want that so bad...they want to control the rest of us because...well we are all just too damn dumb to take care of ourselves, right? It's all for our good, right? UM: Back to Holder. Is he gone or does he stay? WHI: Out of our hands. Republicans have been given what they need. They just gotta get in the ring now and start swinging away. Hit something for f-ck's sake. HARD. UM: How about some of your Democrats help them to do that? WHI: I don't have any of "my Democrats". They are all dead and gone or sittin' back home wondering...same as I wonder...how in the hell it got so bad so fast. (Pause) Democratic Party is dead. Gone. We hung ourselves in 2008. Obama was the rope. Snapped our necks and gave us that sh-t for brains grin while he done it. UM: You helped with that rope in 2008. WHI: F-ck you - we all did. You don't...no need to remind me what I done. ...And if there was a Republican Party with just a little more balls...this thing woulda been wrapped up by now. Holder been gone and gone a long time ago. And back to Chicago with it. They got that - they know the deal there. Investigate that DOJ - investigate those wire taps. Investigate that prosecutor. The guys dyin'. Thing I told you about Vegas...how long ago? Here's the deal - it's all f-cking there. One by one by one...it's a hell of a mess but if they had the nuts to go after it...they could get it done. Media would have to take it on. (Pause) But I'm just an old has-been see? When bodies start showing up...courage leaves the room real fast. Nobody wants to risk anything on principle. Doin' the right thing is doin' the dead thing - that's what back to Chicago is in all of this. Fast and Furious...as bad as that is...that thing was just to get the ball rolling. Get Holder gone, peel away the DOJ onion...and see the real ugly inside. UM: So if Holder were to go...all of the rest - all that Back to Chicago scenario you have always been speaking to...it finally comes out? WHI: Used to think that...there would be a good month or so of chaos at DOJ...a window where people would be given the chance...and maybe find just enough courage to walk upright for once. You know? Man-the-f-ck UP. This thing got dragged out so long though...and Jarrett put West in there...he's hangin' real close to Holder now...sh-t, they probably got a real solid contingency in place by now. This thing took too f-cking long to get on. (Pause) Don't wanna think on that anymore - see what the Republicans do with it this week. F-ck 'em. All of 'em. Democrats. Republicans. It's all bullsh-t. Circle-jerkin' mother-f-ckers. Not a real man in the bunch these days. John f*cking Wayne has left the building man - and he slammed the door behind him. (Pause) Ah...godd-amit, I apologize son...said I wasn't gonna...know you don't like all the cursin'. Been a rough one. Past week. Got me feelin' so damn OLD. UM: How about the Middle East stuff? The embassy attacks? I have been trying to get out as much information on that as possible. Is that going to hurt Obama like it should? WHI: It will - it IS hurting him. Not as much as it should - media is in 24/7 protect mode. That whole things stinks...not just the president's reaction to it. Not just the lying by the administration...but the fella who was killed...that ambassador. Now this is me - this is just me thinkin' here. What my gut is tellin' me on this...that guy was no ambassador. Officially yeah - but off the books. He was CIA. Had to have been. You made a comment in one of your stories...'bout how it was like Fast and Furious except in the Middle East. Somethin' like that. UM: That if Obama was willing to arm Mexican drug lords, why not Muslim extremists. WHI: Right - somethin' like that. Think you might a nailed it there without knowing it. You meant it as...like a bit of sarcasm there at the end of what you wrote - but you actually said what the real deal is. Obama sent a sh-tload of weapons into Libya during the Gaddafi thing. Had no idea who they were going to...just...tens of millions of dollars worth of high grade weaponry. Now you think folks like al Qaeda and other militant groups won't notice? It was a take what you need weapons supermarket courtesy of the Obama government for them! Not much different than what happened in Egypt. UM: How so? WHI: You got Egypt. You got Libya. Both of them were run by...basically they guys running the show were non-practicing Muslims, right? Mubarak - he couldn't stand the Muslim hardliners and he beat the sh-t out of them every chance he got. Him and his military cronies. So he kept the peace that way. He kept business open to American and European interests. Things weren't perfect, but a hell of a lot better than say,Iran. He could tell Iran to shut the f-ck up, and Iran had to consider it because Egypt had some real muscle. It had a military, and it had the backing of the West. (Barack Obama shaking hands with former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. A year later Obama would be calling for Mubarak's removal from power) Now Libya...Gadaffi was a real sh*t. Sick bastard. But like Mubarak - he didn't like the Muslim hardliners in Libya either. Especially if they were gonna cause trouble for him. So he would intimidate the sh-t out of them too. At least over the last decade or so. Gaddafi had two coming to God moments in his life. The first was when Reagan bombed the hell out of his palace. He knew he coulda died then. He knew the West could come in and take his life if it wanted. So he moderated. Then there was 9-11. And when Bush went into Iraq and did his thing - they found Hussein and put him on trial and hung the bastard...that scared the hell out of Gaddafi. Really got inside his head. So he moderated some more. He was actually...my understanding...he was actually becoming a regular contributor to our Intel. By that time he couldn't stand al Qaeda anymore than we could. Maybe less so because they posed an even more direct threat to him. And what happens? The dumbest pile of sh-t that has ever sat in that White House helps to force Mubarak and Gaddafi out - and we got no real plan for the aftermath. All kinds of people are telling the administration the Muslim Brotherhood could take overEgypt. Could take over Libya. They either ignored those warning or that is EXACTLY what they wanted to happen. They are warned that Gadaffi's departure will create more chaos in Libya and there are a sh-tload of weapons that will be unaccounted for. That is exactly what happens. Obama doesn't give a sh-t. Too busy golfing. Doing the talk shows. Right? Telling Israel to go f-ck themselves. Dancing around Iran instead of punching them right in their f-cking face. Jarrett is Iranian. Jarrett has long ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. You would think, maybe for one f-cking second, enough people in the media would think maybe - just maybe...we should take a closer look at all this. (Pause) What if that ambassador fella...what if he was killed by weapons sent there by Barack Obama? Just like you said in that off-handed way. And what if there are tens of thousands of those weapons being used by al Qaeda right now? Maybe on their way to the Israeli border? And not just guns 'cause that's not all we were sending into Libya you know. We're talking some high powered take down an airliner kinda stuff. And take it a bit further. We did that. And we did it knowingly. We did it willingly. The Obama White House. Their hand picked stooges in the military, in State. They did that. Now let me go one little step more here. What if that ambassador...well...let's say he came across certain information...damaging to the administration. Why is he flying into that consulate in Benghazi? Cover of night. No security precautions. Anti-Western sentiment reaching critical levels. It's almost like he was trying to keep his whereabouts unknown to his own government. Right? And that bullsh-t little YouTube video thing? It had been out for...what - months? Nobody gave a sh-t about it. NOBODY. But then it is being used as the spark to start the fire? Who did that? Who would want to get those sand...get those people are riled up like that? And the administration - they are saying it was that video right out of the gate, right? Like it was a packaged excuse ready to go. Packaged means it was part of something bigger. A bigger plan, right? UM: (Interrupts) Hold on - I apologize. I just want to ask you if this is all your own speculation - or if you received information. (Military Insider?) You're getting pretty specific here - and that usually - all the times we've done this...usually means you received information from another source. WHI: This is me. Just me. ...so like I said...the video thing...it's part of a packaged plan. They are running that excuse HARD. Libyans are saying it's bullsh-t. London media...they got a sh-tload of people in Libya too who know - there is stuff going on between us and the Brits...they ain't happy with Obama. Not all of them. So basically everyone BUT the Obama administration is saying the Benghazi attack was pre-planned, right? Terrorist attack. And what is Barack Obama doing right at that time? He's flying to Vegas. He's doing goofy interviews. His White House just keeps repeating the video excuse over and over again. So is this all just a pile of incompetent sh-t by the Obama administration? By Clinton? Did you notice how Defense said very little? And the CIA...Petraeus... has said nothing? In this town, some times the ones speaking the loudest are the ones not saying a word. UM: And then we get the "secret" Romney 47% video released. WHI: Right - right. Obama was starting to take on just a little bit of heat on the Middle East sh-t and that tape comes out. That thing wasn't meant to come out this early. Late October, maybe - certainly not now. But they are so spooked and confused over the polling data, they released it sooner. That means the Middle East situation has them afraid. People are actually asking some questions now. Sniffing around the situation just a bit. And if they get somebody in the military...somebody like that...to go on the record with this...with whatever had that ambassador acting so strangely right before he was killed...well-well-well... UM: So you're going conspiracy on this? WHI: Oh yeah. That was no accidental killing of the ambassador. And it wasn't just al-Qaeda acting alone. They had approval. From somebody linked with our side of the fence. UM: And you're really just speculating here? WHI: (Pause) ...Sure. Just me on this...just me thinking on Barack Obama - the Butcher of Benghazi. UM: That has a ring to it. WHI: The truth often does. UM: Even if we win this election...Obama is defeated. Is there still time to save this country? Or are we too far gone? WHI: You been talking to the Old Man? 'Cause that's EXACTLY how he put it to me a few days back. Too far gone. Somethin' about...he went on about muni bonds. How that Ponzi scheme...how he didn't think they could stop the collapse. I don't understand all that sh-t. (Pause) You haven't talked to him? UM: No - not recently. WHI: Well...he's...he told me so I don't think he'd mind you knowing. UM: Knowing what? WHI: He's...how'd he put it? Closing shop? Already has the family out you know. Like he said he would. Now he's getting ready...even with his health...he's considering going himself. Not sure how he'd manage his treatments... He's about as paranoid as I've ever seen him...and that goes back a while. UM: Why? Something...was there a specific event that got him so spooked? WHI: I don't wanna talk for him - shouldn't even be talking this much about him. (Pause) He said this though...he said...and maybe this is why he isn't including you. For some kind of protection. Doesn't want you involved. He seems determined about something. Not sure what he's got planned - but he's up to somethin'. ...Said people have forgotten that there is both a loving god and a righteous god and that it's gonna be a righteous god America is about to meet up with. UM: What do you think that's supposed to mean? WHI: Not sure. It means something - he don't talk to talk. But who knows? He's lookin' to meet up with God soon enough I suppose. UM: And he said that the situation is "too far gone" for America? WHI: That's how he put it. Word for word. That's why I thought you talked with him recently. UM: How about my question - what do YOU think? Is America too far gone? WHI: Hell son...I ain't never gonna give up on this old girl. Her and I...it's been a lifelong love affair. She's a tired and cranky b-tch...but so am I. Semper Fi motherf-cker. ...I don't quit. END INTERVIEW. ______________________ RELATED UPDATE - THANK YOU TO ULSTERMANREPORT.COM READER "WHISTLEBLOWER" : DOJ SILENCES OBAMA ASSOCIATE WITH HIS FREEDOM http://www.scribd.com/doc/116778493/The-Utter-Insanity-of-Obama-and-the-CIA-Starting-World-War-3-in-the-Middle-East-Must-Read-Documents