The Real Reason for the Attack on the US Embassy in Libya

According to Tariq Ramadan, chair of Contemporary Islamic Studies at Oxford, the real reason for the attack is that it was payback for the June 2012 killing of Abu Yahya al-Libi, an al-Qaeda leader -- NOT the movie mocking Muhammad.

The attack was planned well in advance -- purposely set for Sept 11th.

The White House is pretending that it wasn't warned in advance and it's all about the movie.

The attack was from the Salafi (Salafiyyah), Sunni Literalists and an extension of Wahhabism. They are funded from different groups in Saudi Arabia.

Ramadan points out that the Salafi have not been involved in politics until very recently, and then very suddenly they were active in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt. Very interesting.

I am aware that Tariq Ramadan has family connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. His mother's father was Hassan al Banna who founded the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928. Tariq's father, Said Ramadan, was also a prominent member of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Despite all of that, in this case, I believe Tariq Ramadan is telling the truth.

Watch the interview here:

www.democracynow.org...

interesting. could the truth slowly be leaking out?!!!

They just hate the west period,anything else pops up its just gravy.

Originally posted by reficul
interesting. could the truth slowly be leaking out?!!!

Dear God, I hope so.

Originally posted by haven123
They just hate the west period,anything else pops up its just gravy.

That's true, but what I hate are the blatant lies from this White House.

They keep insisting it's the movie that incited the attacks. BS.

reply to post by AuranVector


the govt. wants to keep you dumbed up to believe the muslim 'savages' would be so stupid to kill over this retarded film!
guess what,its working just fine!!!!
who are the dumb ones again? the msm is still broadcasting the 'film theory',and are more interested on who actually made the film (scapegoat?) that whats really happening over there.
i'm to the point that i don't believe anything the govt.,or the news says,and i shake my head in disbelief
about the people who proclaim we go kill all the muslims!!!
'send in drones,send the battle ships,send the marines,lets go kick some ass!
are these sheeple that blind!
since the govt. has them so brainwashed,maybe washington should send them a letter saying they just won a free trip to their local fema camp,for the whole family!!! all expenses paid!!!

Originally posted by reficul
reply to post by AuranVector

 

the govt. wants to keep you dumbed up to believe the muslim 'savages' would be so stupid to kill over this retarded film!
guess what,its working just fine!!!!
who are the dumb ones again? the msm is still broadcasting the 'film theory',and are more interested on who actually made the film (scapegoat?) that whats really happening over there.
i'm to the point that i don't believe anything the govt.,or the news says,and i shake my head in disbelief
about the people who proclaim we go kill all the muslims!!!
'send in drones,send the battle ships,send the marines,lets go kick some ass!
are these sheeple that blind!
since the govt. has them so brainwashed,maybe washington should send them a letter saying they just won a free trip to their local fema camp,for the whole family!!! all expenses paid!!!

I have really dark suspicions that TPTB have intentionally created provocation to push people into conflict.
Then we have the justification to go in with a big stick.

But Islam is a peaceful religion. (in my sarcastic voice).

Originally posted by meggiddo2012
But Islam is a peaceful religion. (in my sarcastic voice).

I despise Islam too. And it doesn't seem to take much to push their hatred of Americans out into the open.

But in this case, I am alarmed at how the Obama Administration lies blatantly about the real reason for the Benghazi attack.

Maybe because if they admitted the real reason, they would have to admit that Intelligence sources had warned them an attack was imminent. And they ignored the warning.

O.k. so thats Lybia.

How do you explain this breaking out in Over 20 countries.. yep that's right, it's not just 4 anymore. Fox news and the NY Times reports this is happening in at least 20 countries !!!!

www.nytimes.com...

I hope you don't mind me using your thread to pose a couple general questions.

Have there been protests in Saudi Arabia?

www.reuters.com...

Does the Kingdom censor it's citizens so strictly that they don't hear about such things?
Or have they heard about it and are more civilized than that?

Or would they be up in arms the most since that's essentially the birthplace of Islam?(says the article)

I would find it interesting that the Saudi's interject an opinion on the matter while at the same time shielding it's population to the fact which would erupt twice fold there.

I mean they seem very practical in their statements, as it seems they can clearly see what's happening.
Denouncing the group, condolences to the US etc.. confusing stuff lol

is money talking here?

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
O.k. so thats Lybia.

How do you explain this breaking out in Over 20 countries.. yep that's right, it's not just 4 anymore. Fox news and the NY Times reports this is happening in at least 20 countries !!!!

www.nytimes.com...

This thread is specifically about the reason for the Salafi attack on Benghazi based on the interview of Tariq Ramadan.

As for why Muslim rioting has spread to so many other places, there could be a variety of reasons. Some of it could be organized. Some of it could be "sympathy" riots in support of their Libyan & Egyptian "brothers." Or it could be simple copycat activity. There's plenty of hate for Americans around the world -- especially in the Muslim world.

My guess it was a false flag - El CIA'teh hit to keep these phoney wars alive. The we hate Muslim's theme was kind of getting played out - maybe to get the country ginned up for a hit on Iran.

Originally posted by yourmaker
I hope you don't mind me using your thread to pose a couple general questions.

Have there been protests in Saudi Arabia?

www.reuters.com...

Does the Kingdom censor it's citizens so strictly that they don't hear about such things?
Or have they heard about it and are more civilized than that?

Or would they be up in arms the most since that's essentially the birthplace of Islam?(says the article)

I would find it interesting that the Saudi's interject an opinion on the matter while at the same time shielding it's population to the fact which would erupt twice fold there.

I mean they seem very practical in their statements, as it seems they can clearly see what's happening.
Denouncing the group, condolences to the US etc.. confusing stuff lol

is money talking here?

Saudi Arabia is a mystery. The Salafis (or Salafists) who attacked the US embassies in Benghazi & Cairo are an extension of Saudi Arabia's own Wahhabism and are funded by Saudi groups.

I believe the Saudis play both sides of the fence. Remember Osama bin Laden was a Saudi.

As for the Saudi citizens rioting without the permission of its royal family would be dangerous to say the least.
The Petro-Monarchies are not democracies.

Originally posted by BABYBULL24
My guess it was a false flag - El CIA'teh hit to keep these phoney wars alive. The we hate Muslim's theme was kind of getting played out - maybe to get the country ginned up for a hit on Iran.

I've had those dark suspicions myself. Which is why Tariq Ramadan asks the question, "Who is behind the movies?" Who is using highly charged symbols to provoke fury and push people towards a clash?

reply to post by AuranVector


Your explanation of this doesn’t make sense. There are attacks in 20 other countries and on German and British embassy’s. It just doesn’t add up.

Attacks on German and British embassies in Sudan, the ransacking of an American school in Tunisia, a fire at a U.S.-based fast-food restaurant in Lebanon and attacks against multi-national peacekeepers in Egypt's Sinai Peninsula

CNN

Excerpt:

VICTOR M. GOODE
Flushing, Queens, March 28, 2012

The writer is an associate professor at City University School of Law.

What Mr. Gottlieb omits in his letter is that the “fear” he associates with the public’s willingness to support military intervention is largely manufactured. In many of America’s military interventions since the Spanish-American War, elites have fanned, manufactured and exploited public fears to shore up support for interventions that are utterly unrelated to any national security interests but have everything to do with American corporate interests.

Indeed, the foreign policy makers are very often once and future officers of the very corporate interests that the military is deployed to protect. Confusing economic interests with national security interests is nothing new, but as long as corporate interests dominate the policy-making apparatus, we will witness the discovery of endless enemies in need of policing.

Source: Letters: Sunday Dialogue: How We Decide When to Go to WarPublished: March 31, 2012
www.nytimes.com...

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by AuranVector

 

Your explanation of this doesn’t make sense. There are attacks in 20 other countries and on German and British embassy’s. It just doesn’t add up.

Attacks on German and British embassies in Sudan, the ransacking of an American school in Tunisia, a fire at a U.S.-based fast-food restaurant in Lebanon and attacks against multi-national peacekeepers in Egypt's Sinai Peninsula

CNN

You didn't read my response to JohnPhoenix who raised the same question:

This thread is specifically about the reason for the Salafi attack on Benghazi based on the interview of Tariq Ramadan.

As for why Muslim rioting has spread to so many other places, there could be a variety of reasons. Some of it could be organized. Some of it could be "sympathy" riots in support of their Libyan & Egyptian "brothers." Or it could be simple copycat activity. There's plenty of hate for Americans around the world -- especially in the Muslim world.

How does my OP not make sense?

Originally posted by RELDDIR
Excerpt:

VICTOR M. GOODE
Flushing, Queens, March 28, 2012

The writer is an associate professor at City University School of Law.

What Mr. Gottlieb omits in his letter is that the “fear” he associates with the public’s willingness to support military intervention is largely manufactured. In many of America’s military interventions since the Spanish-American War, elites have fanned, manufactured and exploited public fears to shore up support for interventions that are utterly unrelated to any national security interests but have everything to do with American corporate interests.

Indeed, the foreign policy makers are very often once and future officers of the very corporate interests that the military is deployed to protect. Confusing economic interests with national security interests is nothing new, but as long as corporate interests dominate the policy-making apparatus, we will witness the discovery of endless enemies in need of policing.

Source: Letters: Sunday Dialogue: How We Decide When to Go to WarPublished: March 31, 2012
www.nytimes.com...

Excellent RELDDIR, I agree with Victor Goode's response to Gottlieb's book review. Goode's opinion reminded me of Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler's "War is a Racket."

I don't trust our leadership or the "shaped" news from our corporate media. I get the distinct feeling we are being herded towards war. And not just any war this time, but something that will turn into WWIII.

It's designed to distract us from a global economy that is crumbling. Plus the Elites usually make lots of money from war. And there's the added bonus of de-population. War is a time-honored method of culling the herd.

reply to post by RELDDIR


I forgot to comment on Stuart Gottlieb's line about our (US) "limited HUMANITARIAN action (as in Libya)" -- which would have me laughing out loud, if it weren't so dishonest & tragic.

Our involvement in Libya had nothing to do with "liberating" the Libyans from an evil dictator. It had everything to do with taking over their assets -- which were divided up between the UK, France, Qatar, and US.

In fact, I have deep suspicions that the whole "Arab Spring" farce had everything to do with intentionally destabilizing these countries, so the radical elements could take over. Now we have "reasons" to go into these areas with our military.