Posted on 10/23/2012 8:06:32 AM PDT by penelopesire
President Obama’s once seemingly unstoppable march toward re-election hit what he might call “bumps in the road” in Benghazi, Libya, late on Sept. 11, 2012. It might be more accurate to describe the effect of the well-planned and -executed, military-style attack on a diplomatic facility there as the political equivalent of a devastating improvised explosive device on the myth of the unassailability of the Obama record as commander in chief. Thanks to intrepid investigative reporting — notably by Bret Baier and Catherine Herridge at Fox News, Aaron Klein at WND.com and Clare Lopez at RadicalIslam.org — and information developed by congressional investigators, the mystery is beginning to unravel with regard to what happened that night and the reason for the subsequent, clumsy official cover-up now known as Benghazigate. The evidence suggests that the Obama administration has not simply been engaging, legitimating, enriching and emboldening Islamists who have taken over or are ascendant in much of the Middle East. Starting in March 2011, when American diplomat J. Christopher Stevens was designated the liaison to the “opposition” in Libya, the Obama administration has been arming them, including jihadists like Abdelhakim Belhadj, leader of the al Qaeda franchise known as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.
Read more: GAFFNEY: The real reason behind Benghazigate - Washington Times http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/22/the-real-reason-behind-benghazigate/#ixzz2A8P6Tk5U Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
(Excerpt) Read more at p.washingtontimes.com ...
If this is true, I hope President Romney has the balls to go after Obama. This speaks to exactly what we all here know about Obama: His goal is to destroy America.
The sad part of this story is that it is breaking today, the day the Donald will take over the front pages with bull kaka.
The Truth About Libya Comes Out . . .
Townhall.com ^ | October 23, 2012 | Carol Platt Liebau
Posted on Wednesday, 24 October 2012 10:03:06 PM by Kaslin
New information from Reuters makes it absolutely clear how much deliberate prevarication and dishonesty there was emanating from The White House and the State Department in the wake of the Benghazi attacks.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2949348/posts
PING
Diplomad thinks it was about Arms to Syria via Turkey
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2949401/posts
if anyone complains, tell them I said it was okay to repost Frank Gaffney articles anytime :)
This is exactly why I cringed during this last debate when Romney was talking about sending arms to aid in ________ (fill in the flavor of the day). Just like all the failed food and monetary aid we send around the world, weapons will always get into the wrong hands.
You’re right about Beck. And, he was the first to expose Soros and Van Jones, as well.
It did not turn up in a search.
The search stinks. I’ve had multiple posts deleted. I would search before I posted, come up with nothing, only to find that what I posted had already been posted.
"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."
September 20, 2012 quote from the Ulsterman Report, which is banned on Free Republic, btw. Post titled "The Butcher of Benghazi."
Freepers, I need you feedback on my theory...
Romney didn’t go their on Bengazi because as POTUS he may have to direct the resources need to investigate / prosecute said matter...
He didn’t want to say a thing to muck-it-up...
A penny for your thoughts...
I think Romney realized two things -
The President was ready to drag the debate down into the weeds and Romney wanted to look nice and Presidential instead of looking angry and partisan. The media would have rushed to the defense of Obama if Romney had attacked on Benghazi. Romney wanted to portray himself as a non-threatening alternative to Obama for the mushy undecideds and he succeeded.
The Benghazi story is unraveling at a breathtaking pace and the media is doing the work. Romney did not have to mention Benghazi because Obama is already paying a price for it.
About a future investigation. Romney is not focused on any future investigation - he is focused on getting elected. The trend is Romney’s friend right now so I think he chose to play it safe and it worked. We would have loved to see the shots, but Romney (correctly in hindsight) saw that a different tactic would be more effective for his campaign.
Congress is going to wade into Benghazigate with both feet. If Obama loses, the teflon that surrounds him and his administration will start to crack.
Thanks for the ping!
Oh boy, I don't want to go their but Romney pulls a Ford and Pardon's him just to get him the H@!! off the stage with a proviso he shuts up and lives a low key life....
This is also not out of the question....
That said, this thing could be the 'surprise' Obama's looking for - folks in the know are acting strange. Like in a few days it will be shown that Obama and Hillary were falling on their swords - rather than sticking them in someone's back - all for the sake of the country they love - and there won't be enough time to debunk before the election. Something doesn't add up with this scam... something's strange.
Arms Flow to Syria May Be Behind Benghazi Cover-Up
A Rapidly Unfolding, Deeply Disturbing Story
By Clare M. Lopez
EDITOR’S NOTE: The following article by Clare M. Lopez, one of the best analysts around, is riveting—and troubling, to put matters mildly. Foreign Confidential™ has repeatedly criticized the Obama administration for effectively narrowing the definition of the Islamist enemy to Al Qaeda alone under political cover of degrading the terrorist group (not “decimating” it, as claimed by the administration and its supporters) and killing Al Qaeda’s leader, Osama Bin Laden. It now appears, however, that we were wrong; incredibly, even Al Qaeda itself, or, at the very least, its ideological allies, are regarded by the administration as all right to appease and engage (align with), as shown by the deeply disturbing information that is surfacing in the aftermath of the … September 11... attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The entire affair calls … cries out … for a Congressional investigation.
The day after the big Obama-Romney debate, as media and politicians were engaging in the usual after-action assessment frenzy, some of the most important issues surrounding the September 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, remain unaddressed.
While it clearly matters (a lot) if and when the President told the truth to the American public about the terrorist nature of that attack and why the Department of State refused repeated pleas from its own diplomats in Libya for more and better security, the deeper, unaddressed issue is about the relationship of the U.S. government, Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya with Al Qaeda.
During the 2011 Libyan revolt against Muammar Qaddafi, reckless U.S. policy flung American forces and money into the conflict on the side of the rebels, who were known at the time to include Al Qaeda elements. Previously the number two official at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, Christopher Stevens was named as the official U.S. liaison to the Libyan opposition in March, 2011.
Ambassador Authorized to Aid Al Qaeda Sympathizers
Stevens was tasked with helping to coordinate U.S. assistance to the rebels, whose top military commander, Abdelhakim Belhadj, was the leader of the Al Qaeda affiliate, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). That means that Stevens was authorized by the U.S. Department of State and the Obama administration to aid and abet individuals and groups that were, at a minimum, allied ideologically with Al Qaeda, the jihadist terrorist organization that attacked the homeland on the first 9/11, the one that’s not supposed to exist anymore after the killing of its leader, Osama bin Laden, on May 2, 2012.
More here:
http://chinaconfidential.blogspot.com/2012/10/arms-flow-to-syria-may-be-behind.html#links
Thank you for the link. I watched this very credible woman on Beck’s show the other day too.
Here is a link to that Reuters article. But there is far more that revealed therein. The Reuters article is really designed to stop the rush to judgement that would occur should the whole truth be known.
Obama is in bed with Al Qaeda. And the weapons given them will be used for a generation to kill Western infidels and knock aircrafty out of the sky. This almost assures a nuclear strike on Iran in the future.
Obama is a very, very bad utopian fascist. Few understand that he has already caused 100s of thousands of unnecessary deaths in Pakistan, Libya, Egypt, Kenya, Yemen, Sudan and now in Mali.
BIG
B U M P
” It seem that Romney stepping back on the issue during the debate, may have been because he knew what was about to come down.”
I think so.
Also, Lopez was interviewed by Frank Gaffney Oct 23 here. I was going to put it into my most recent post I pinged you to, but just too much at one time.
BTW: I wanted to give you the website above anyway. I just started to download his program (and some archives---9/27/12 on Blind Sheik) in the past couple weeks and have elevated him to the top of my download program list). I don't know why I didn't do it before. He regularly interviews Bill Gertz and routinely has top quality interviewees and cites excellent articles:
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.