posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 11:15 PM
reply to post by Resurected
You're definitely right about the OP's source being biased
One thing I wanted to point out that the article you posted covered and that's the Al Qaeda connection. The article says there is no evidence that
this was an operation by Al Qaeda but to rule them out would be a mistake. Al Qaeda fighters were well known to be amongst the rebel group, the rebel
leader says so himself to journalists (but he insists they are all good Muslims
). So right there is confirmation. The next confirmation came
when Al Qaeda planted their flag on government buildings.
Al Qaeda has a strong presence in Libya and in my opinion this attack wasn't spontaneous but planned for 9/11's 10 year anniversary.
Attack on US Benghazi Consulate Could Have Been Intended to Drive US Out of Libya
Further, the attack fits with a broader effort by the Al Qaeda affiliate and the militant group Ansar al-Sharia to establish an Islamic state
in eastern Libya, it added.
According to the report, those militants are also capitalising on the proliferation of weapons, including portable surface-to-air missiles called
MANPADS, since the Gaddafi regime fell.
Former CIA Director Porter Goss said that the belief that militants were trying to throw the western forces and diplomats from the region 'is a very
He said that they likely "are trying to create more sanctuary areas by pushing us out-our diplomats, our military", the report added.
Apparently the Brits suffered attacks in Libya and got the hell outta there but the US will not bow out so easily. Clearly we are still in the Middle
East and not looking to leave anytime soon. Attack the US means the US is moving in.
edit on 19-10-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)