Posted on 05/16/2013 12:43:34 PM PDT by MestaMachine
BENGHAZI DOT ONE, WHY THE VIDEO AND WHY AP
This began as a response to a question posed by 'just a hairy ape' on a previous thread. To fully understand Benghazi, I have to go back and break this down into parts. There was more than one reason and we need to understand them all which isn't easy,(and even less easy to explain,) because there are details long forgotten as if each 'thing' was in a box of its own separate from each other 'thing'. In reality, they are connected in a myriad of ways. So this is going to have to be a series. Step by step. Inch by inch. Slowly we turn.
This was the question that started the response. He was alluding to obama's speech at the UN where he continued to blame the video.
"So Obama was endorsing the terrorist attack against the US ?"
My response: "On a worldwide stage."
I am going to repeat this since I have been reminding people to remember how the whole video thing started.
obama was, and had been, embroiled in yet another showdown with Netanyahu. IT WAS STAGED. The dustup was that he refused to meet with Bibi at the UN. Netanyahu had already beaten obama at his own game a multitude of times and it was well known that obama hated him.
Netanyahu was in the middle of Israeli elections and the obama admin had already sent people over to do everything they could to unseat Bibi as Israel's PM. It wasn't working...not even close.
Meanwhile, obama had been searching for a way to give the third and final edict that the US was/is a muslim country. He had already done it twice in muslim countries but never on our own soil. And NOW there is yet another damning twist in this horror story.
If you want the full meal deal, bookmark this because it's only one of more to come.
Here are the mini-dots on DOT ONE.
The very first story out of the box is that the vid maker was an 'anonymous' Israeli Jewish billionaire.
But then. along came AP.
Anonymous Filmaker found by AP
The anti-Muslim film implicated in mob protests against U.S. diplomatic missions in the Mideast received logistical help from a man once convicted of financial crimes and featured actors who complained that their inflammatory dialogue was dubbed in after filming.
The self-proclaimed director of “Innocence of Muslims” initially claimed a Jewish and Israeli background.
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, 55, told The Associated Press in an interview outside Los Angeles Wednesday that he managed logistics for the company that produced “Innocence of Muslims,” which mocked Muslims and the prophet Muhammad.
The AP located Bacile after obtaining his cellphone number from Morris Sadek, a conservative Coptic Christian in the U.S. who had promoted the anti-Muslim film in recent days on his website. Egypt’s Christian Coptic populace has long decried what they describe as a history of discrimination and occasional violence from the country’s Arab majority.
Nakoula denied he had directed the film, though he said he knew the self-described filmmaker, Sam Bacile. But the cellphone number that the AP contacted Tuesday to reach the filmmaker who identified himself as Bacile traced to the same address near Los Angeles where Nakoula was located.
Nakoula told the AP he is a Coptic Christian and supported the concerns of Christian Copts about their treatment by Muslims.
**********************************************************
As Walid Shoebat revealed however, not even that was a the truth, although the WH has never stopped claiming it. In fact, they ignored Shoebat's revelation which laid out Nakoula's entire background and exposed him as an FBI asset and a muslim.
Innocence of Muslims made by Terrorists
Shoebat ^ | 9/25/12 | Walid Shoebat
Posted on Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:17:32 PM by Ben Barrack
Excerpt:
There is more to the story of Nakoula Basseley Nakoula than what we are told by the media. Court documents reveal that Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, producer of the movie Innocence of Muslims, partnered in a scheme with Eiad Salameh, my first cousin, a Palestinian Muslim from Beit Sahour in the Palestinian district of Bethlehem.
*****************************************************************************
NO ONE has followed up on Shoebat's assertions. Why not?
BUT NOW YOU KNOW WHY DOJ WENT HARD AND FAST AFTER AP! Because only the PLANNERS knew the identity of the vid maker. So if AP found him, they concluded that someone very high up in the planning MUST have leaked it and they were damned frantically trying to find out who. In other words, they PANICKED, and holder recused himself because he is involved in this up to his shifty eyeballs. Nakoula was a DOJ asset...so holder HAS to be involved and so far, no one has even thought to question him about Benghazi.
The WHY of the vid was to be able to claim that Israel was responsible for the planned attack on Benghazi which they knew was coming on September 11 to avenge the death of ya ya al libi which they had NO INTENTION of stopping.
They knew the word was out to hit Stevens long in advance and aquiesced to it because that is the way they have done business with al qaeda for years. WE hit a 'high value' target, and we give them one back. Does ANYONE still believe that the downed Chinook with 20 Navy SEALs on board was just a routine taliban attack?
NO.
But this time, they also had other fish to fry and david petraeus is nothing if not a fantastical fish fryer. How do you think he got to be head of the CIA in the first place?
The gunrunning out of Benghazi was his op in collusion with brennan, obama, and clinton. They were NOT simply running guns to Syria, Many of those weapons were being diverted through Turkey to the muslim brotherhood in Egypt and being smuggled across the Rafah Crossing into Gaza for use against Israel...and Israel was beginning to expose it.
THIS time they could set this up to blame Israel, make Netanyahu VERY unpopular here in the US, cost him his election, and possibly facillitate an actual all out attack on Israel by an al qaeda/mb backed army which would have cost Israel dearly in blood and treasure.
So they brought in their trusted thug at DOJ and the plan was hatched well in advance. What is worse is that it would have worked if everything had gone exactly as planned.But it didn't.
There would have been NO witnesses left alive. It would have been a complete slaughter had Ty Woods and Glen Doherty not disobeyed direct orders.
We would not be looking at cables sent begging for help. We would not know that help was not only denied on that terrible night, but that Stevens' security had been reduced to nil. I believe he knew he was going to be sacrificed. It was pretty obvious. What he probably didn't know was why.
There are ALWAYS variables you don't foresee like the Cairo Embassy apologizing to protesters before there were any, and this op had plenty more of them.
Snafu one- Woods and Doherty.
Snafu two- CNN found Chris Stevens' diary in the burnt out shell before the CIA or FBI got there.
Snafu three- AP found the video maker.
Snafu four- They decided to RUN with the original script that it was the video that caused the uprisings, but they changed it to reflect that Nakoula was a protesting Coptic Christian from Egypt.
Snafu five- Once AP found the guy, Walid Shoebat found out that his partner in crime was none other than Shoebat's own first cousin...a pa terrorist...and that Nakoula was an FBI asset.
NOW look back and recall that obama had just previously started an international argument with Netanyahu which swept the front pages of every major news outlet in the world. A deliberate snub of Netanyahu for a meeting at the UN. And yet on the very night of September 11, in the MIDDLE of the attack in Benghazi, obama calls Netanyahu and talks for an hour, unaware that the SEALs had screwed his plan. Had the op gone as planned. the morning headlines would have had Israel in their crosshairs and obama could then say he was arguing or angry with Netanyahu and THAT was the reason for the irrelevant phone call during the heat of the battle in Benghazi.
obama went to bed that night thinking about, and probably rehearsing for, his news conference about the slaughter of 41 Americans because of Israel's recklessness putting Americans in danger all over the world.
obama went to bed that night without issuing any orders whatsoever and made himself unreachable. Anyone who WANTED to do something, couldn't. The ONLY person who could have nade a difference that night was obama...and he was AWOL.
obama went to bed that night without a care in the world...and when he woke up, hell was breaking loose. So what did he do? He followed his campaign schedule because he hadn't a clue what had happened.
After they found out what had gone wrong, they stubbornly stuck to the script, proof or no proof, to give obama his day in the sun at the UN. Worse, he and clinton tried to deliberately provoke even more muslim violence to blame on the video by making a commercial ostensibly for Pakistan, but shown around the world apologizing for it where no one ever heard of it.
Well, he couldn't attack Israel. He couldn't blame Netanyahu. But he could still GLORIFY ISLAM at the UN and they kept the video story alive until he completed that task by announcing, and I quote, "The future must not belong to those who slander the HOLY prophet of Islam."
This might be one of the most evil speeches I have ever seen in my lifetime.
So now you know why the video and why AP. And I will end here because DOT TWO will be coming ASAP.
How many actually realize there are oligarchs playing with post turtles though?
So they announced the AP phone records scandal and connected it falsely to Yemen. This was cover for the possibility that the real story about phone records being accessed because of Benghazi was going to break soon ? Why else would they openly admit to breaking the law ? Unless it was cover for some more serious law breaking.
This is how they work. They always assume we are all incapable of maintaining our focus, so they dribble out 20 or thirty different versions of the same story, (or 5 different stories at one time,) until it’s ALL meaningless, outrageous, and nowhere even as near to the truth as the first one which they hope no one remembers so that criminal pols like hillary can actually say, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”.
That’s why I keep saying to keep your eye on the prize.
Thanks Ernest.
He did not say “holy” (prophet of islam) in the speech you linked.
“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” is what he said.
YES he did. I watched it live. It was scrubbed from the official transcript. It was HIM going off sctipt.
Ahhh! Thank you!
I’d be banned if I posted my thoughts.
God forgive me.
You do great work here FRiend.
Thank you very much and I will read carefully, and a well desrerved BTTT.
A must read.
Wow. Just read it again carefully in entirety.
You are a wonder, MM - thank you - you put it all together - can’t wait for part 2.
The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied.
I’m not saying I agree or disagree with the comment that this is an ‘evil speech’…. but context means everything when people speak.
Of course 0 had to include some other “who the future doesn’t belong to) for padding and a setting for the meat of his statement about slandering Islam. I didn’t realize he even said “The holy prophet” (you ommitted the “holy” part). His condemnation of slanderers of the prophet is much more weighted than the other statements.
Plus, he never critizes (other than may the most occasional and very rare token) those who kill and slaughter Jews or Christians or destroy their places of worship, or blaspheme their religions. What about his support of MB in Egypt, wehre Copts are harrassed and killed? Or in Syria, where Christians are slaughtered and tormented by the Islamic rebels?
Sheesh, you need to learn more or gain some sense.
I have hardcore leftist relatives but I am not a leftist.
As for your other comments, I think that you are being unnecessarily harsh and frankly, off base…. I’m not arguing that the rest is ‘padding and a setting for the meat’ or that Obama only gives rare token rebukes involving the killing of Christians etc. That may well be absolutely true but none of those statements have anything to do with what I was saying. When people pull red meat sentences such as this out of a long document and make absolutely no reference to the context, it just ends up looking stupid when somebody does read the context. Now if you want to pull the sentence complete with its context out to make some comment that the rest of the sentences are just padding, that makes perfect sense.
Sheeesh, try reading things a bit more carefully next time, do a bit of research or gain some sense.
weare being asked to take Walid’s COUSIN’s word for the FBI connection, not Walid’s word. Walid’s cousin is still a part of the Pali hate Israel terrorist camp. I prefer to not take the world of Walid’s cousin. Is that clearer?
Thanks and apologies to both - I shoudl have read more before attempting to reply. I do that sometimes; post too early and regret it.
Bad news sometimes makes me a bit ill tempered and I need to watch that I don’t vent on those who don’t deserve it.
It looks as though Shoebat said that Nakoula is the FBI asset, not Shoebat’s couson saying it, from what Hardraade said. Maybe he will clarify.
Now I certainly understand being ill-tempered from analyzing too much news from the zero. That will do it to you. Regardless, we all need to remember to measure twice and cut once..... Happy Posting.
I will continue waiting to find out which ... take care, m’Lady.
Thank you - I just took a 2 or 3 month break from FR and I have to watch my step. Too much immersion in this vile cesspool of treason and corruption news and I get affected by it.
There are plenty of things in my actual life that are neglected so it’s not as though I have noghitn to do!
I hope you are well - interesting times ahead no doubt.
Here is what happened. The transcript of the speech was handed out before he gave it. When muslims speak of the prophet, it is holy prophet. So when he was actually at the podium, he reverted ro his natural self, to what he has been taught, and the way he would normally speak to muslims. He did not follow the script. But the media printed the transcript they had been handed. It’s as simple as that.
I watched it. And it isn’t the first time he’s done that. He also speaks that way when he talks about the ‘holy quran’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.