Whistleblower Exclusive: The Benghazi cover-up is the proxy battle with the war with Iran

Canada Free Press ^ | May 28, 2013 | Marinka Peschmann

[don-o]

The immediate concern for the Obama-Clinton regime after the attack in Benghazi was to cover up the connection with Iran and Syria to Ansar al Sharia and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), according to my Benghazi whistleblower source. The attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, was not a terrorist attack; it was a nation-state attack, an escalation of war, and an opening of a new front in the tit for tat conflict with Iran and by extension their proxy partner Russia that is now being fought in Syria.

For anyone who thinks Americans will be told that Benghazi was a nation-state attack by ex-CIA chief David Petraeus in the near future they are in for a disappointment. He is part of the problem and has been for years. He sold his soul for shiny medals and financial perks and circuses long ago—and as his record shows, he will roll over again and again. Recall how Petraeus fell into lock-step rank-and-file with President Obama and Hillary Clinton when he joined them in falsely misleading America before the 2012 elections by blaming an “out-of-control demonstration prompted by a Youtube video” for the Benghazi attack to the House Intelligence Committee three days after the attack. He’s as dirty as they are.

In addition, tell me please, how can a man who sends troops to war, on multiple deployments, with duffle bags full of medications, under suicidal, unwinnable polices like catch and release and COIN, while watching the military suicide numbers soar (22 a day or one every 65 minutes) have a conscience or any sense of right and wrong? To be fair that question includes the morally bankrupt Congress, particularly the long serving members who have allowed these policies that are destroying America’s military

[don-o]

ping

[Paladin2]

More like the 0bama support for the Arab Caliphate.

[Uncle Miltie]

Content free “reporting.”

Something happened in Benghazi, but this guy is clueless.

Or, he buries actual information on the second page.

[don-o]

Reading the article will help.

[Uncle Miltie]

Incorporating content into the first three paragraphs would help.

[GeorgeWashingtonsGhost]

The writer is simply framing Petraeus’ character.. Shattering the myth of him as a Patriot, anyway.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks don-o.

The attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, was not a terrorist attack; it was a nation-state attack, an escalation of war, and an opening of a new front in the tit for tat conflict with Iran and by extension their proxy partner Russia that is now being fought in Syria.

[don-o]

Thread linked in Five myths about Benghazi

[jobim]

Could the Saudis, without the U.S./NATO intervention,
have overthrown Assad by arming the Syrian rebels alone to
install the Muslim Brotherhood and expand their reach? No,
if the Saudis could have accomplished that, Assad would have
been gone months if not over a year ago. The Saudis need U.S./NATO
intervention. Do not be deceived. As reported here, the same
applied for Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Col. Muammar Gaddafi
in Libya—two leaders who had banned the Muslim Brotherhood in
their countries. Are you awake yet?

Remember when the Benghazi nation-state attack that killed
four Americans happened, America was in the final weeks of the
2012 presidential election cycle. A proxy war with Iran could
not be known to the public. It was unacceptable for Americans
to know that at any time troops could be sent into Syria
which will explode into Iran. This is the reason why the Obama-Clinton
regime pulled out this obscure Youtube video as the chief culprit
to blame for the attack in Benghazi—a YouTube video that doesn’t
appear anywhere in their infamous “Talking points” that were
repeatedly edited to deceive Americans. The Youtube video was
intended to distract the public’s attention to what is really
going on in the Middle East. It worked. Indeed. Under a heavy
fog of deception Obama was reelected.

I cannot find a flaw in her scenario, but I profess no expertise. The pieces fit together as I see them. Thanks for this excellent post, don-o.

[American Constitutionalist]

" The attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, was not a terrorist attack; it was a nation-state attack, an escalation of war "

So IF and a big IF ? if this was not a act of terrorism then ? it was a bold act of war by Iran ?
Franklin Commie Roosevelt allowed the Imperial Japaneses bomb Pearl Harbor while most of our pacific fleet Aircraft Carriers were out to sea, and Obama allowed 4 Americans one who was our US Ambassador die.

[dirtboy]

Phantom high-level sources talking to no-name bloggers is all the rage.

[MestaMachine]

As I have been telling you from the very start.

Anyone wanting on or off this ping list, please advise.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

So Al-Queda is on the side of the Sunni's in Syria and against Iran.,...but on the side of Iran in Libya?

Damn I could get confused.

[pax_et_bonum]

Thanks for posting, don-o, and thanks for the ping, Mesta.

I wish this didn’t answer so many of my questions.

I feel nauseous.

[Marine_Uncle]

IMHO, some state secrets take many years to be fully exposed in books. To many actors on different levels of the playing field to make a final decision as to what went down in Benghazi in detail at this time.

[OwenKellogg]

For anyone who thinks Americans will be told that Benghazi was a nation-state attack by ex-CIA chief David Petraeus in the near future they are in for a disappointment. He is part of the problem and has been for years. He sold his soul for shiny medals and financial perks and circuses long ago—and as his record shows, he will roll over again and again.

---

As a veteran, as a patriot, as an American, this makes me sick. You’ve got a Four Star Retirement - for crying out loud - let go of Ms. (LTC) Broadwell and do what’s right.

We have been screwed.

[justa-hairyape]

Damn I could get confused.

From the article.

Ansar Al Sharia, according to Saudi intelligence, is backed, funded and directed by Iran. They are enemies of the Saudis and are trained by Iran’s Quods forces.

Who else was in Benghazi? A faction of AQIM Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb backed by Syria. Syria, like Iran was in Benghazi. What was going on in Syria? There was gunrunning and arms smuggling from Libya through Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan into Syria as well as bringing in fighters to engage in a war with Syrian President Assad—the backdoor to Iran.

Two different groups fighting each other in Bengazhi. The Benghazi attack was inevitable given the circumstances and it was the opening salvos in WWIII.

[Marine_Uncle]

RE: "Did Iran and Ansar al Sharia take advantage of that
,...knowing the attack would be blamed on Al-Queda....?

I respect your question. But I don't have an answer.