Benghazi: Behind the scenes/ Interview with Intelligence Insider (Part II)

www.canadafreepress.com...

The Obama administration has yet to come clean about the lies concerning Benghazi. 4 dead Americans scream from their graves for justice, that the truth be told to the American people. Had the truth come out before the election it was a sure bet Romney would now be the President- elect.
More answers are found here that we are actually arming our enemies in a crazy attempt to destabilize the few moderate Arab states left such as Syria. There are many more players on this stage than just Islamic militants versus the "good guys". Syria, Iran, Turkey, Russia and others are all under threat by our activities in Libya. The real story is far more complicated than Muslims getting upset over a youtube video:

First, what was the makeup of the ‘hit teams,’ or who were the attackers? We have verified that the attackers were a combination of members of Ansar al Sharia and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), but they were operating under the flag of Ansar al Sharia. Who is Ansar al Sharia? Iranian terrorists. They are a terrorist group that receives their training by and funding from Iran. Now think about this. Carefully consider the implications here. IRAN. It’s the elephant in the room no one wants to mention or talk about.

I'm not convinced the author has this part right, Others have a vested interest in stopping the flow of illegal weapons getting to the hands of Al Qaeda.besides Iran, But he has much more to say on the subject apparently so perhaps further articles will reveal more details to complete the picture of events.

www.canadafreepress.com...


Read part one here:
Benghazi explained: Interview with an “Intelligence Insider”
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also consider this. One of the men stationed at the compound, a British national, left the compound at about 9:20 p.m., reportedly to get more phone cards. That’s right, phone cards, like you would buy at Walmart. Why? Because the men at the compound ran out of minutes. Just who do you think they were talking to that day to burn through the minutes, and why do you think they needed them at that exact time?

That part smells really the CIA's budget got cut so much they need to use unsecured prepaid phones?

Come on

The Cia uses crypto sat phones don't they?

Originally posted by neo96

Also consider this. One of the men stationed at the compound, a British national, left the compound at about 9:20 p.m., reportedly to get more phone cards. That’s right, phone cards, like you would buy at Walmart. Why? Because the men at the compound ran out of minutes. Just who do you think they were talking to that day to burn through the minutes, and why do you think they needed them at that exact time?

That part smells really the CIA's budget got cut so much they need to use unsecured prepaid phones?

Come on

The Cia uses crypto sat phones don't they?

I had to laugh upon reading that.
Pre paid phone cards? Really?
I find that bit rather implausible.
I'm sure the guy left for a pack of smokes instead.
(or to avoid getting smoked, not sure which )

reply to post by Asktheanimals


They said Benghazi was in inside job, and he did not get smoked.

So there is the rat.

The story has its good points, but I am a little suspicious about it being an actual "interview" because the interlocutor style appears a bit off to me. Its seems more like one person giving their alleged 'insider point of view' - does it matter if its only one voice here? Perhaps not! But it does give several different angles from which to examine this entire incident, so there's value in that alone, and that makes it a good read, and I'll be looking forward to the next installment.

PS - I suspect that there was a security issue involved in the use of pre-paids -- they might have been untraceable, i.e., not detectable over certain networks............just a hunch there, but terrorists are known for using pre-paid phones because they are not identifiable through a network plan.

What could be more secure than an anonymous person paying cash for a cheap prepaid No contract cell phone, then paying cash for minutes. How would anyone know its a spy when the phone is connected to no one but some anonymous person. He could pay a straw buyer to get him the phone if he thinks hes being watched. Then I am sure they talk in a simple code known only between the people on each end of the phone. I doubt Ansar Al Sharia have the equipment to track cell signals.

Originally posted by geldib
What could be more secure than an anonymous person paying cash for a cheap prepaid No contract cell phone, then paying cash for minutes. How would anyone know its a spy when the phone is connected to no one but some anonymous person. He could pay a straw buyer to get him the phone if he thinks hes being watched. Then I am sure they talk in a simple code known only between the people on each end of the phone. I doubt Ansar Al Sharia have the equipment to track cell signals.

edit on 29-11-2012 by geldib because: (no reason given)

See my remarks on that in the post above - you took the words right out of my mouth........

This story sounds like as much a crock as all the others.
It still seems like a wag the dog story.
I looked up the background stories on the 3 mercenaries or inside/outside government guys and
their stories seem equally like a crock.

Even the one about Stevens. In his memorial down at City Hall where, you know like where most
everybody has their memorial these days, pffftt, I read several newspaper accounts and I don't remember
reading anything about the family. Or in the others either for that matter although one was credited with
having a wife, she didn't say anything. And no memorials for them, really just stories about how they liked
snowboarding and playing video games and really just story stuffers, to make them seem "real".

There is something about this whole affair that reeks of it being a media invention provided by the CIA who
well, basically run the media anyway.

From the first youtube trailer story to this trac phone dealio, it reads like bad spy movie drivel.
How do I know this ever happened besides some video clip that could have been made by the youtube
guy for all it's looking like a set. I'd like to know what this alleged compound cum consul cum embassy
looked like before it's alleged demise.

I am very much reminded about the non-bin Laden death scene, which also seemed scripted about an event that never really took place.

reply to post by PaperbackWriter


You make some very good points. It's true we have no way of knowing if the entire thing was a hollywood production from the get-go. I do think we would have heard someone tell otherwise who was on the scene after though, but one never really knows -especially in today's world.

There is a trail of ruined military careers which resulted from the fallout of this.
I'm pretty sure that stands as testimony that something important went down.

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Something went down, but maybe they just needed a halfway believable cover story to hold up as the reason why.
It seems as if the main point of this latest chapter in the eye-rolling saga, was an excuse to invoke the names
Al Ciada and Ansar al Sharia.
The latter, which I confess I had to look up, seemed like just another fake jihadi group to name as generic
boogey men for perhaps future black bag jobs in desert lands by our own intelligence agency.

Maybe they just put this Trojan Horse before the cart because the giant horse is all people are looking at
now and not the cart, at all.