posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 03:42 PM
When you correlate the State Department's own press conference, their testimony in Congress, the news stories about help being ordered to stand down,
and the analysis by many people with military experience in some of the links in this thread, it paints a pretty dire picture.
This is mostly an educated guess based on the info we're getting, but it looks like probably no Americans were meant to survive the original attack
on the compound. And it might have gone that way if a handful of people at the CIA annex had not allegedly disobeyed orders and gone to the compound
to try to help.
Then when there were survivors that made it back to the CIA annex, the annex was attacked and help was again mostly denied, or at least greatly
delayed. Kind of sounds like someone was trying to finish off what they started and correct the mistake (that there were survivors of the original
attack...). Or maybe the attack on the annex was always planned, so that there would not be anyone to leak that they had been ordered to stand
If things had gone according to plan (no survivors), I'm guessing that we never would have heard most of this and it would have been easier to make
the cover story work. But now there are too many people who were told to stand down (e.g., everyone on the gunship). So now it's become a race for
people to do CYA (insiders leaking info, the CIA throwing Obama under the bus, Hillary allegedly seeking legal counsel, etc.). And Obama is
desperately trying not to have it all blow up any bigger before the election.
It would be interesting to find out why the people at the compound originally were apparently targeted to die. There must be more to it that just
arms running to Syria. No one would really be very shocked to knows that's going on, so there wouldn't be such a severe need to cover that up by
killing an ambassador and his staff.
I'm not saying this is what happened... but it sure seems more logical than the lies we're being fed.