“So, not only is the President and the Secretary of State directly implicated in the affair, so is the current Director of the CIA.”
Which is, as you know, the reason they were selected for those positions, to guarantee their silence and make sure everyone else maintains that silence.
At first i thought this was a CIA detention operation, but now I’m going with the gun-running operation. 30+ people is just too many people for a facility that wasn’t even an embassy. (I haven’t been keeping up with this, so my theories are most likely old news; perhaps even outdated.)
Whatever it was, it was huge and warrants their extreme and ongoing cover-up measures, that’s for sure.
I've been inclined toward the gun-running explanation myself.
But stop and think about that. If the admninistration admitted to "providing arms to the Syrian rebels", how big a deal would that be? We were already giving them money -- and what would they spend it on but weapons? And if somebody objected to arming the Syrian rebels without Congressional approval, they could always seek refuge behind Ronald Reagan and Iran-Contra.
I'm starting to think there may well be something more than gun-running to the Syrian rebels (which, we're pretty sure, was going on with Turkey's connivance). What it might be, I've no idea -- but it's apparently scandalous. At this point, I believe you've got to think like John Brennan...and I'm not up to doing that.