Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Uncle Miltie

That doesn’t make sense.

If the Ambassador supplied weapons to Al Qaeda in Syria, why would Al Qaeda in Libya want to kill him?.

By the way...... the weapons in question were not smuggled, they were transported.


17 posted on 11/01/2012 6:23:13 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... Present failure and impending death yield irrational action))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: bert

AQ in Libya is thought to have attacked that particular facility because some of the weapons were being stored there and they wanted to get their hands on them (and probably did).

They spent hours looting the place.


22 posted on 11/01/2012 6:28:37 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: bert
If the Ambassador supplied weapons to Al Qaeda in Syria, why would Al Qaeda in Libya want to kill him?.

This is my question and the $64,000 question that separates this story from a massive cover-up a questionable clandestine operation to cover-up of incompetence for election purposes.

Based on stories today, Obama (via Hillary) has now separated the US from Al-Qaeda back leaders in the Syrian Opposition. This is significant because this provides motive to the operatives in Libya to attack the consulate.

Although this news is almost 2 months after the attack, that does not mean this decision was just made... it was already made and delayed because of the attack.

Somehow though Russian sources, our operation became exposed. As I have posted, this is a drug deal gone bad. Obama pulls out of the arrangement, but a big problem exist, we have arms to be shipped to Syrian. So the Libyans attack the consulate primarily to capture the weapons surrendered to US Operation for shipment to Libya. We don't call in for help because it is a deal gone bad, i.e,. you don't call the cops because someone stole your drugs.

Everything posted can be backed except the idea weapons were on site. Even if weapons were not there, it does not mean the Libyans though that. (It maybe the weapons were delivered but the Libyans did not know that).

35 posted on 11/01/2012 7:15:14 AM PDT by 11th Commandment (http://www.thirty-thousand.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: bert

There’s the big question.


38 posted on 11/01/2012 7:41:58 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: bert
If the Ambassador supplied weapons to Al Qaeda in Syria, why would Al Qaeda in Libya want to kill him?.

Why would Al Qaeda work with Obama after he killed the founder of Al Qeada, Osama Bin Laden ? Lots of things make no sense when it comes to the Obama/Hillary regime.

My best guess, it was not Al Qaeda. They are always the go to group in the international blame game. The number 1 suspect, given all the circumstances, this was payback from Assad for the attempted assassination of Assad by the Hillary/Obama regime. They took out the apparatus that was acquiring the loose weapons in Libya that were being transported to the Syrian rebels. That fits the entire scenario, IMHO.

46 posted on 11/01/2012 9:49:41 AM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson