I've been following this story very closely since the start, as I'm sure many of you have, and discussing the inconsistencies and suspicious quality
of certain details of what happened with my mother who is quite distraught over what is happening.
I just woke up, so I'm going to shower and then start my search, but I remember specifically reading reports that conflicted with the asphyxiation and
my mom has helped corroborate that for me. She is a big watcher of the news on TV (mostly FoxNews, unfortunately) so she always gives me an accurate
representation of what the normal person would be getting for information from the mainstream media on television. I'm able to see what the narrative
it is they are driving at through her eyes. On TV, they were heavily pushing from the start that he had been violently murdered, not that he had
suffocated. This was in the first few hours and the first day of these events, so yes, there is always confusion and now you can look at it as if they
are "getting it right", but I think those first few hours are very telling.
I know I'm on ATS but I do not try and find a conspiracy in everything, quite the contrary. I try and let the facts lead me to a conclusion. The facts
in the case are telling me that this is all very strange, and I will be back with the links and quotes from news articles to show exactly what I mean.
I'm spending today doing a full analysis of who Chris Stevens was, what happened during the day he was murdered, and the video that has been used as a
cover for his assassination.
It can pretty much be proven by now, though I'm sure some of you may not believe it, that this was a pre-planned attack and there were warnings that
never reached the embassy staff. Those people went their specifically to blow this place up at the very least, and most likely to kill the Ambassador.
So, why would they have fired a few rockets and then called it good and went back to their homes and made lunch? Wouldn't they have wanted to get the
job done, so to speak?
I'm not saying that he didn't die from smoke inhalation, as many of you have said that was reported early on, as well. I just find it curious that he
was separated from his security group and then wound up with not so severe injuries that led to his death after his embassy had been attacked by RPGs
I always find it interesting people think that people from different sides of an event will tell conflicting reports and this almost always leads to
confusion. Police and other investigators, when trying to figure out a crime or major event, always begin by interviewing eyewitnesses and finding
consistencies that will tell a tale. I've been involved in an event where I was interviewed along with many others after the fact and despite the
confusion, it was the eyewitness testimony that helped the investigators figure out what happened due to us all seeing the same things. I'm not saying
this is always the case, I'm just saying dismissing it off-hand immediately as confusion based on witness reports may not always be correct. I see
that a lot of ATS.
I also watched the movie directly after this started and I was laughing out loud at how ridiculous it was. It is weird and strange as hell, and the
dubbing is highly suspicious.
And let's not forget about the other 3 who died. What were their causes of death? I thought I read that they had been killed quite deliberately. Or at
least Sean Smith had been discovered dead. Not sure if this was before their move to the safe house or after, I believe it was afterwards. That's
probably the strangest part of the story. They were being hit by rockets with pin-point accuracy. The people firing them didn't just know the location
of the secret safe house, they seemed to know exactly where they would be within it.
Many of the people interviewed for comment on the story have also referred to the Ambassador as being murdered, and use terms like "murdered this way"
as if he was killed in an extremely despicable fashion. If had just been asphyxiation, I wonder why they would talk like that. His death is tragic no
matter what way you look at it, but saying murdered as opposed to killed seems to imply more had happened. This is totally the conspiracy side of my
brain working here, but when you do a Google search for 'Chris Stevens murdered' I notice that the word 'killed' is searched for and comes up bold in
the blurbs of each website. I have never noticed anything like that before, usually the only emboldened words are hits for what you have searched for
or typed in the search bar. After putting quotations around 'murdered' however I get what I'm looking for.
Eugene Rogan, director of the Middle East Center at Britain’s Oxford University, was skeptical of how much advance planning went into the assault.
“The State Department is going to have to exhaust every possible cause for the violence that took place. It is an extraordinary thing to have one
of your ambassadors murdered in this way. And they will have to get to the bottom of what happened. I think you will find that the spread of anger
across the Arab world in response to this recent posting of this very inflammatory and insulting film against Islam is something that they are going
to have to address.” He believes the makers of the movie and the posting of the trailer dubbed in Arabic was done to provoke “knowingly and
There were conflicting reports of the circumstances surrounding the deaths Tuesday night. Al-Jazeera reported Stevens died of smoke inhalation after a
mob attacked the consulate and set it on fire. Reuters, citing an unnamed Libyan official, said the four Americans died after militants fired rockets
at their car in Benghazi.
edit on 18-9-2012 by PatriotGames2 because: (no reason given)