Hillary Clinton Supplied Weapons from Benghazi to Al-Qaeda in Syria

True Pundit just released a classified document that outlines a number of weapons being shipped to Syria from Benghazi. They include: 500 sniper rifles, 100 RPGs and 400 howitzer missiles along with ammo.

And here Hillary Clinton said she didn't know that any weapons were shipped out of Libya.



The source, True Pundit, seems to have contact with Wikileaks per the author's twitter. I touched on this in another thread about Assange being on Obama's Killer Tuesday list

The thread title is from True Pundit, but shortened. The whole title is "Wikileaks Bombshell Leaked To True Pundit: Hillary Clinton Supplied Weapons from Benghazi to Al-Qaeda in Syria" suggesting that Wikileaks sent the document.

If that's the case, we may see this document show up in future Podesta leaks but not redacted.

The Intel provides official confirmation of what has been rumored for years: President Obama, his White House, and Hillary Clinton and her State Department knew that weapons were being shipped from Benghazi to rebel troops in Syria. Those “rebels” were largely al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood extremist factions, according to corroborating documents.

So just who was running these guns and weapons to Syria? The document is heavily redacted (and for obvious reasons) ........ this confirms that weapons were on the move prior to the Benghazi attack, despite testimony from U.S. officials to the contrary. But it also raises more disturbing scenarios and troubling questions.

Did the Obama administration provide weapons to Islamist extremists who used them to kill four Americans in the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. compounds in Benghazi? This latest DIA cable might dovetail with secret intelligence reports previously obtained by The Washington Times indicating the Obama administration armed Islamist extremists and rebels in 2011 as Clinton was trying to overthrow Libyan strong man Muammar Gaddafi.

link to Washington Times article that was mentioned above.




Ghost

Did she actually Deny it?...or just say: She didn't know; She forgot...or she didn't intend to do it?

a reply to: ghostrager

Before I might have thought that Hillary was just weak, incompetent and out off touch.

I was wrong.

This is just plain evil.

Ops fixed, therefore comment deleted showing error.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Good point, fixing OP to reflect.

"weapons from the former Libya military stockpiles located in.."

This is disinformation in the line of "Hillary Clinton is a liar", while she didn't have anything to do with this transport.

Or can you show otherwise?

Unless so, I say this is crap, designed to create throw dirt on a presidential candidate WHO DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS?!

Outragous! I don't care for Mrs. Clinton, nor would I ever vote for her, even if possible - Mr Trump is deep in brown stuff and he and his minions desperatedly grap for every straw they imagine possible to taint her in any way possible.

While Mr Trump does things on his very own which are very, very despicable.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ghostrager

Before I might have thought that Hillary was just weak, incompetent and out off touch.

I was wrong.

This is just plain evil.

The US has a tradition now of supplying weapons to rebels that are trying to overthrow dictators who annoy us.
Problem here is that we never learn. the rebels are radicals and the dictators may be jerks, but they keep things in line quite often..so we end up with things like the taliban, muslim brotherhood, isis, etc
Blaming Hillary for policy that has been established since the cold war is disingenuous. You think Bush administration did differently? Clinton? Reagan, etc..
The policy and how we interact with other nations needs to change here...otherwise, this is simply a legal policy allocation done by the entire department.

a reply to: SaturnFX

For gods sake!

We armed Bin Laden and he turned on us.

This speaks to the gross incompetency of DC!

a reply to: ghostrager

The entire illegal action in Libya is a black enough spot on Mrs. Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, but if this can truly be linked to her or even her subordinates then it becomes a work of 'darkness' to an even greater magnitude than I had thought. All that said, I think it is secondary to the entirely illegal action in Libya in which the USA participated under President Obama and Secretary Clinton in the invasion and overthrow of a stable Islamic government in North Africa that had taken a larger and larger role in pan-African stability.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: SaturnFX

For gods sake!

We armed Bin Laden and he turned on us.

This speaks to the gross incompetency of DC!

Not really remembering any rebels who didn't turn on us. I guess Kuwait remained non threatening, but that was more a state than a group.

We need to back out of middle eastern politics. they aren't interested in democracy, just let whoever becomes biggest overlord to carry on and buy our oil from them while working on alt energy..meanwhile build a gigantic wall around the whole area...and move Israel to like florida or something.

originally posted by: Kapriti
USA participated under President Obama and Secretary Clinton in the invasion and overthrow of a stable Islamic government in North Africa

Are you discussing the NATO intervention and enforced no-fly zone lead by france and the UK which the US had some command shared with them?
Invasion?
Stable government?

....you're so off here its impossible to even know where to start.

So I wont. just pointing out the nonsense seems good enough. How can you expect to be taken seriously if you have to screw up reality to such an extent just to say you dont like the dumb US policy of arms deals?

a reply to: ghostrager

Do you know the difference between Secretary of State and the Department of Defence?

a reply to: ghostrager

Lol, it's talking about weapons being shipped from Qudaffi's stash, not by US, but by Libyans. Wow

a reply to: DBCowboy

What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with the State Department. This is an intelligence report from the Department of Defense discussing the movement of weapons in Libya.
This is not Clinton shipping weapons.

a reply to: ghostrager

What's up with "True Pundit" putting big red "REDACTED" and "CLASSIFIED" fake stamps on the document? Wow. Right off the bat anyone who would pull something like that has lost major credibility points.

The title of the article isn't supported by the content:

Hillary Clinton Supplied Weapons from Benghazi to Al-Qaeda in Syria

becomes (my bold):

"President Obama, his White House, and Hillary Clinton and her State Department knew that weapons were being shipped from Benghazi to rebel troops in Syria. Those “rebels” were largely al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood extremist factions, according to corroborating documents."

That's a major difference.

Then by the time we get to the document that is supposed to be "proof" — it has been marred in an image editor which is frankly unbelievable to me (which is why I mentioned it again!)

Setting that aside, the document — even if 100% real (and I'm not arguing it isn't) — doesn't support the conclusion stated in the title at all. The sad part is I actually have no trouble believing that the US did it, this just isn't conclusive evidence. A few points in no certain order:

- It's an unverified "informational report"
- It says that the weapons were from the Libyan stockpiles.
- It doesn't say who did the shipping.

What this document might demonstrate is that one US agency saw evidence of the operations of another US agency but it's not at all clear from the document alone. I think in its pristine form, it might serve a purpose in establishing the validity of a more complete hypothesis but as it stands it's not conslusive, it's not what it's purported to be and it's being presented by an anonymous source who doesn't appreciate the importance of pristine documents.

Not good.

a reply to: SaturnFX

This paper is from the wrong Department and it is an intelligence briefing about arms inside Libya. Has nothing to do with USA supplying weapons.

State Department ... Department of Defense. State Department ... Department of Defense.

Seriously?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: SaturnFX

For gods sake!

We armed Bin Laden and he turned on us.

This speaks to the gross incompetency of DC!

How can the war machine keep rolling along if they have no one to fight? We are the new Romans if we don't have an enemy to fight we will create one.

a reply to: ghostrager

So while we were fighting bin Laden they were arming him?

Wow I bet he's not even dead

Lmao.. how can anyone still support her?

She needs to go to b prison she is responsible for the death of americans

a reply to: SaturnFX

You are free to believe whatever you like. Rather than embrace the propaganda underlying your response, I prefer to see reality through similar lenses to those employed by the writers of the links below:

Attacking Libya and International Law

Libya, NATO, and International Law

NATO's secret ground war in Libya

Hillary Emails, Libya