Tag Archives: CIA

Jon Rappoport on Edward Snowden

Unanswered questions for ex-CIA officer Edward Snowden
by Jon Rappoport
March 18, 2015
NoMoreFakeNews.com
Now that the documentary, Citizen Four, has been released, and now that it has won an Oscar, it’s time to revisit unanswered questions, which I raised soon after Snowden’s identity was revealed to the world. (Spygate archive here)
This is not an article about the value of the documents Edward Snowden took from the NSA. I leave those judgments to others.
This article is about Snowden himself and his back-story.
So far, I see no reporter who has directly asked Snowden even faintly challenging questions about his background.
I find that quite odd. And the number of people who don’t find it odd makes the situation even odder.
If a man came to me, stating he was an ex-CIA officer who had taken a huge cache of vital documents from the other major spying agency in the US, the NSA, I would want to know a great deal about him.
I wouldn’t care that he was an engaging young man who appeared to be committing a heroic act on behalf of freedom. I wouldn’t care, because I know that people who work for intelligence agencies are prepared to lie. They are trained to lie. They believe in lying. This is basic knowledge that any reasonable reporter would have.
Yet, in Snowden’s case, an exception has been made. Why?
As soon as you see a photo of Snowden for the first time, you realize he’s the perfect image of the techie’s counter-spy: young, thin, bespectacled, “vulnerable.”
You have to wonder: if he’d been 60, balding, fat, with a constant sheen of nervous perspiration on his chubby cheeks, would he have grabbed so much positive attention from the get-go? Would reporters have refrained from grilling him about his back-story?
Within a day of Snowden’s identity being revealed, details of that story appeared in the press.
Upon reading the story, a number of questions sprang to mind. To my knowledge, none of them have been satisfactorily answered, or even posed by journalists who have had direct access to Snowden.
Why do potential or possible holes in Snowden’s back-story matter? Because holes always matter. They can lead to unexpected discoveries; they can reveal that a person is more than he says he is, different than he says he is.
In 2003, at age 19, without a high school diploma, Snowden enlists in the Army. He begins a training program to join the Special Forces. The sequence here is fuzzy. At what point after enlistment can a new soldier start this training program? Does he need to demonstrate some exceptional ability before Special Forces puts him in that program?
Snowden breaks both legs in a training exercise. He’s discharged from the Army. Is that automatic? How about healing and then resuming Army service?
If Snowden was accepted in the Special Forces training program because he had special computer skills, then why discharge him simply because he broke both legs?
Circa 2003 (?), Snowden gets a job as a security guard for an NSA facility at the University of Maryland. He specifically wanted to work for NSA? It was just a generic job opening he found out about?
Also in 2003 (?), Snowden shifts jobs. He’s now in the CIA, in IT. He has no high school diploma. He’s a young computer genius?
What kind of work does he do for the CIA until, in 2007…
He is sent to Geneva. He’s only 23 years old. The CIA gives him diplomatic cover there. Diplomatic cover is serious status. Snowden is put in charge of maintaining computer-network security. A major job. Obviously, he has access to a wide range of classified documents. Sound a little odd? He’s just a kid. Maybe he has his GED by now. Otherwise, he still doesn’t have a high school diploma.
Snowden reportedly says that during this period, in Geneva, one of the incidents that really sours him on the CIA is the “turning of a Swiss banker.” One night, CIA guys get a banker drunk, encourage him to drive home, the banker gets busted, the CIA guys help him out of that jam, and then with that bond formed, they eventually get the banker to reveal deep banking secrets to the Agency.
Snowden is this naïve? He doesn’t know by now that the CIA does this sort of thing all the time? He’s shocked? He “didn’t sign up for this?”
Furthermore, if this banker story is true, and if Snowden is the source for it, why did he reveal it? All sorts of people should be able to do a little digging and figure out who the Swiss banker is—thus blowing the banker’s cover and exposing him. Was that Snowden’s intention?
In 2009, Snowden leaves the CIA.
It should noted here that Snowden claimed he could do very heavy damage to the entire US intelligence community in 2008, but decided to wait because he thought Obama, just coming into the Presidency, might make good changes.
After two years with the CIA in Geneva, Snowden really had the capability to “take down most of the US intelligence network,” or a major chunk of it? He had that much access to classified data?
Snowden goes on to work for two private defense contractors, Dell and Booze Allen Hamilton. In this latter job, Snowden is assigned to work at the NSA.
He’s an outsider, but he claims to have access to so much sensitive NSA data that he can take down the whole US intelligence network in a single day. Really?
How many people work in highly classified jobs for the NSA? Here is one man, Snowden, who is working for Booz Allen, an outside NSA contractor, and he can get access to, and copy, documents that expose the spying collaboration between NSA and the biggest tech companies in the world—and he can get away with it.
If so, then NSA is a sieve leaking out of all holes. Because that means a whole lot of other, higher-level NSA employees can likewise steal these documents. Many, many other people can copy them and take them. Are we to believe this?
“Let’s see. Who’s coming to work for us here at NSA today? Oh, new whiz kid. Ed Snowden. Outside contractor. Twenty-nine years old. No high school diploma. Has a GED. He worked for the CIA and quit. Hmm. The CIA. They don’t like us and we don’t like them. Why did Snowden quit the CIA? Oh, never mind, who cares? No problem.
“Tell you what. Let’s give this kid access to our most sensitive data. Sure. Why not? Everything. Let Snowden see it all. Sure. What the hell. I’m feeling charitable. He seems like a nice kid.”
Sometimes cognitive dissonance, which used to be called contradiction, rings a gong so loud it knocks you off your chair.
Let’s see. NSA is the most awesome spying agency ever devised in this world. If you cross the street in Podunk, Anywhere, USA, to buy an ice cream soda, on a Tuesday afternoon in July, they can know.
They know if you sit at the counter and drink that soda or take it and move to the only table in the store. They know if you lick the foam from the top of the glass with your tongue or pick the foam with your straw and then lick it.
But this agency, with all its vast power and its dollars…with the brightest, sharpest minds in the business…
Can’t protect its own data from outright theft. Can’t lock up its own store. They overlooked their own security systems. Never set them up right in the first place. Forgot to.
And they can’t track one of their own, a man who came to work every day, a man who made up a story about needing treatment in Hong Kong for epilepsy and then skipped the country.
Just can’t find him.
Can’t find him in Hong Kong, where he does a sit-down video interview with Glenn Greenwald and Poitras and MacAskill. Can’t track the reporters to Snowden’s hotel.
Can’t find that place where Snowden’s staying.
No. Can’t find him or spy on his communications while he’s in Hong Kong. Can’t figure out he’s booked a flight to Russia.
Can’t intercept him at the airport before he leaves for Russia. Too difficult.
And this man, this employee, is walking around with three or four laptops that contain the keys to all the secret spying knowledge in the known cosmos.
Can’t locate those laptops. The most brilliant technical minds of this or any other generation can find a computer in Outer Mongolia in the middle of a blizzard, but these walking-around computers in Hong Kong are somehow beyond reach.
And before this man, Snowden, this employee, skipped Hawaii, he was able to access the layout of entire US intelligence networks. Yes. He was able to use a thumb drive.
He walked into work with a thumb drive, plugged in, and stole…everything. He stole enough to “take down the entire US intelligence network in a single afternoon.”
Not only that, but anyone who worked at this super-agency as a systems-analyst supervisor, or higher, could have done the same thing. Could have stolen the keys to the kingdom.
This is why NSA geniuses with IQs over 180 decided, in the midst of the Snowden affair, that they needed to draft “tighter rules and procedures” for their employees. Right.
A few thousand pieces of internal security they hadn’t realized they needed before would be put in place.
This is, let me remind you again, the most secretive spying agency in the world. The richest spying agency. The smartest spying agency.
But somehow, over the years, they’d overlooked their own security. They’d left lots of doors open.
But now, yes now, having been made aware of this vulnerability, the Agency would make corrections.
Sure.
Should we believe the NSA is this weak and bumbling, when it comes to protecting its data, when it comes to tracking down one of its own who has stolen the farm? Or should we entertain the possibility that Snowden didn’t really steal all that information himself? Did someone at the CIA give it to him? Was this a long-term CIA op?
Yes, strange possibilities. But the world of intelligence is strange. It’s designed that way.
May 20, 2013: Snowden arrives in Hong Kong from Hawaii. He’s just taken medical leave from the NSA. This is not troubling to his employer, despite the fact that, as AFP reports, Snowden worked briefly at the US Embassy in New Delhi (2010) and abruptly left India, citing medical problems on that occasion as well.
Both times, Snowden didn’t seek medical help in the country in which he was employed.
June 1, 2013: Three reporters connected with The Guardian—Glenn Greenwald, Ewen MacAskill, and Laura Poitras—fly from New York to Hong Kong, and begin their week-long interview of Snowden. If this raises red flags, it doesn’t lead to intercepting Snowden.
June 5, 2013: The Guardian publishes its first article containing NSA leaks. The next three days see more NSA revelations, but there is no mention of Snowden.
June 9: The Guardian goes public about Snowden for the first time. According to Reuters, the NSA started an “urgent search” for Snowden several days before June 9—perhaps as early as June 1.
June 10: Snowden checks out of his hotel, but remains in Hong Kong. The US intelligence apparatus still can’t find him.
June 12: The South China Post publishes an interview with Snowden, who says he’ll stay in Hong Kong until he’s told he has to go. The NSA still can’t find him.
June 14: The UK Home Office orders airlines to deny passage to Snowden, if he tries to come to the UK.
June 20, 21: The Guardian publishes more top-secret documents from the Snowden cache.
June 23: Free and unencumbered, Snowden flies to Moscow with Wikileaks’ Sarah Harrison.
During this entire period (May 20-June23), the NSA, and other agencies of the US government, have been unable to locate Snowden?
They’ve been unable to get hold of, or disable, his famous four laptops, which presumably contain all the documents he took from the NSA. Instead, Snowden transfers the documents to Greenwald and Poitras in Hong Kong, hides out successfully, and makes his flight to Moscow.
In past articles, based on all these questions and oddities and paradoxes, I’ve spelled out alternative scenarios about who Snowden might be, and what’s really going on here. For this piece, in the wake of Citizen Four, I just want to refresh the questions, the unanswered questions about Snowden and the NSA.
And point out that no reporters who have had direct access to Snowden have pressed these questions.
He’s been given a free pass.
“Well, why should we wrangle with Snowden? He handed us the documents? Why should we look a gift horse in the mouth?”
Because in the spying game, things are not what they seem. In the spying game, ops are layered. They have multiple purposes. Cover stories. These ops conceal their bottom lines.
Snowden worked for the CIA. He was a spy. And at certain levels, the CIA and the NSA hate each other. They compete for federal money, for status, for prestige.
The NSA doesn’t just spy on private citizens. The NSA spies on politicians and bankers and corporate CEOs, and those people know it and they don’t like it, and they want to relieve themselves of that burden and that threat. They want to curb the power of the NSA as it applies to them.
They would welcome, as perhaps the CIA would, putting a crimp in NSA’s spying capabilities, limiting those capabilities in some way, at least giving NSA pause for thought about risking further exposure beyond Snowden’s disclosures.
For these and other reasons, the back-story of Edward Snowden is more than an academic pursuit, and the unanswered questions are of more than passing interest.
Educated privacy advocates who spend a great of their time commenting on security issues may not want to disturb the image of Snowden; and they certainly don’t want to be called conspiracy nuts re their view of who Snowden might be; but reporters shouldn’t care about that. Reporters should vet their sources as thoroughly as possible.
That’s SOP. Only this time, from all available information, it didn’t happen. It didn’t happen when Greenwald, Poitras, and MacAskill met Snowden. It didn’t happen after Snowden gave them his cache of NSA data. And it isn’t happening now.
Jon Rappoport
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com orOutsideTheRealityMachine.

Please follow and like us:
0
 

German officer to serve as U.S. Army Europe's chief of staff

A foreigner is now second in command of US Army Europe

A foreigner is now second in command of US Army Europe


Army Times: A German Army brigadier general who recently served with NATO forces in Afghanistan is assuming duties as the chief of staff of U. S. Army Europe, the first time a non-American officer has held that position.
Brig. Gen. Markus Laubenthal, most recently the commander of Germany’s 12th Panzer Brigade in Amberg, and chief of staff of Regional Command North, International Security Assistance Force Afghanistan, will be stationed at USAREUR headquarters, Wiesbaden, Germany. He could report to duty as early as Monday.
Laubenthal also has served as military assistant to the deputy commander of operations and assistant chief of staff of operations for NATO forces in Kosovo.
As the major staff assistant to USAREUR commander Lt. Gen. Donald Campbell, Laubenthal will synchronize the command’s staff activities much as American predecessors have in the past.
“This is a bold and major step forward in USAREUR’s commitment to operating in a multinational environment with our German allies,” said Campbell.
U. S. and German senior military leaders have been serving together in NATO’s International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan for years. Sustaining the shared capability from this experience will benefit both the U. S. and German armies,” said Campbell who has headed the Army’s largest and oldest overseas command since 2012.
Laubenthal’ s assignment comes at a time of strained relations between the U.S. and Germany as a result of disclosures over the past year that the National Security Agency, and more recently the Central Intelligence Agency, had been conducting information gathering operations against German citizens, to include Chancellor Angela Merkel.
Army sources in Europe said the first-ever assignment of a German general to the USAREUR staff is unrelated to the political furor over the spying revelations, but does reflect the increased importance of multinational operations in NATO.
Officials said the addition of a German general officer to the USAREUR staff has been planned for several months, and is part of an American effort to give a more multi-national flavor to its major overseas commands.
My two cents (with input from my military contact):
This is nothing but sucking up to the Germans and Europe. They say it’s unrelated to the CIA’s actions yet you really believe what this administration tells you? Bet a good US Army officer was passed up for this job, too.
This foreigner is going to encounter restrictions – he won’t be able to view certain US classified documents (NOFORN – Not Releasable to Foreign Nationals/Non-US Citizens), and will not be able to view certain unclassified US documents (i.e., documents containing US soldiers’ social security numbers). But hey, what does that matter? It’s a synchronized multi-national cause! The UN must be thrilled with this.
Update: It was brought to my attention that an Australian is the Deputy Commanding General (Operations) for the U.S. Army, Pacific (USARPAC), who has national command and operational experience. This position works under the Chief of Staff and has the same restrictions (NOFORN).
Still, the appointment of this German to Chief of Staff is the first time a non-American has held this position, which is a level above a deputy for an operating division.
DCG

Please follow and like us:
0
 

British Intelligence: Obama born in Kenya; CIA’s DNA test shows Dunhams not his grandparents

Michael Shrimpton is a British barrister (attorney), an adviser to British intelligence, and a serious person.

He also is a contributing columnist for the blog, Veterans Today. This is his biographical sketch on Veterans Today:

Michael Shrimpton

Shrimpton has his own blog, The Shrimpton Report. His email address is michael@mshrimpton.co.uk. And Wikipedia used to have an entry on him (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Michael_Shrimpton), but if you go to that URL, you’ll get the messsage: “This page has been deleted”.

After you’ve read this post, you’ll know why Wikipedia scrubbed its page on Michael Shrimpton.

Shrimpton was a speaker at a forum, date unknown, but probably sometime in 2008 (more on this later). Beginning at the 1:42 mark of the video below, Shrimpton dropped a bombshell about Obama.

Shrimpton made the following startling claims:

  1. Although Barack Hussein Obama (BHO) is said to have been born on August 4, 1961, he actually was born in 1960.
  2. Obama’s alleged mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was not pregnant in July 1961.
  3. Although BHO is said to have been born in Honolulu, Hawaii, he actually was born in Mombasa, Kenya, which was then British territory, which means British intelligence has his records.
  4. The C.I.A. surreptiously took a DNA sample of Obama at a fundraising dinner and ran a test, but could not match Obama’s DNA with his [maternal] grandparents, the Dunhams.
  5. Former New York governor and GOP presidential aspirant Rudy Giuliani told Shrimpton at a recent lunch that he (Giuliani) knows all about this. Giuliani had hoped he would be the GOP presidential candidate and he’d then use the information against the Democrats.
  6. The Clintons (Bill and Hillary) also know about this.

For the rest of the 1½ hour video, Shrimpton talked about British politics and the European Union. However, at the 1:09:30 mark, a man in the audience asked Shrimpton a question about Obama and Kenya. In his response, beginning at about the 1:11:55 mark, Shrimpton alluded to the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign as if it was ongoing as he spoke, which suggests that the forum took place in 2008. Shrimpton also made these additional claims:

  1. He believes, given the above British intelligence on the year (1960, not 1961) and place (Kenya, not USA) of Obama’s birth, Obama would “soon be pressured into withdrawing” from the presidential race. With the benefit of hindsight, we of course know that didn’t happen.
  2. Senator John Edwards also knows because Shrimpton had briefed him.
  3. Former CIA director (under Bill Clinton) also knows. Shrimpton does not name him. Clinton had 3 successive CIA directors: James Woolsey, John Deutsch, and George Tenet.
  4. The Kenyan government, of course, knows.
  5. The UK newspaper Daily Telegraph also knows.
  6. The Honolulu press is aware that Obama’s birth records in Honolulu’s Queens Medical Center are fake. The Honolulu Advertiser knows this.
  7. Sen. John McCain knows.
  8. British Intelligence knows because MI5 got the Nairobi Special Intelligence files when Kenya became independent.
  9. Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the United Nations from 1997 to 2006, also knows.
  10. Shrimpton also said something very strange — that Obama’s half-sister is actually his full sister, and that the sister is “missing.” (The only “half sister” of Obama about whom we are told is Maya Soetoro-Ng, the daughter of Stanley Ann Dunham and her Indonesian husband, Lolo Soetoro.)

IN OTHER WORDS, JUST ABOUT EVERY FRIGGING POLITICIAN IN THE UNITED STATES AND THE WORLD KNOWS. AND EVERY FRIGGING ONE OF THEM HAS BEEN LYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. EVEN WORSE, THEY MOCK AND DEMONIZE US, CALLING US CRAZY CONSPIRACY “BIRTHERS”.

H/t Gaia Media, via Birther Report.

See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Ex-CIA agent says Obama had Andrew Breitbart and Tom Clancy assassinated

The following account is based on Brandon Walker’s post on The Free Patriot blog, Oct. 10, 2013, with additional information I found.

Jim GarrowDr. Jim Garrow (pic from his Facebook page)

Dr. Jim Garrow is the Christian founder and executive director of The Bethune Institute, a charitable organization dedicated to advance education in China via teaching English, giving free books to poor Chinese, and medical scholarships. Through its branch organization, The Pink Pagoda, the institute also rescues baby girls from infanticide  in China, and finds homes for the unwanted girls. Dr. Garrow is credited for saving the lives of over 50,000 Chinese girls for which he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Last Sunday, Oct. 6, 2013, on the Now the End Begins Internet radio program, Dr. Jim Garrow (email: drjgarrow@yahoo.com) made a bombshell of an announcement.

Garrow claims that up to a week ago he was a covert CIA agent, but was fired by none other than Obama himself because Garrow told the world (on Alex Jones’ radio, Glenn Beck, and several conservative internet mediums) that Obama’s U.S. military was purging top brass using a “litmus test” of sorts. High-ranking military officials were being asked “Would you fire on an American citizen?”. Garrow claims that if one answered no, you would be fired.

But that’s not the bombshell.

Garrow says that he knows Obama had ordered the hits that killed Tom Clancy and Andrew Breitbart!

Andrew Breitbart, 1969-2012In the early morning hours of March 1, 2012, conservative media firebrand Andrew Breitbart collapsed on a street near his home in Brentwood, CA. Breitbart was only 43 years old.

On April 21, 2012, the L.A. Coroners Office released its final autopsy report on Breitbart — that he had died from “heart failure.” That same day, a forensics technician or criminalist at the L.A. Coroners Office, Michael Cormier, died suddenly from suspected arsenic poisoning after complaining about pain and vomiting. (To my knowledge, we still have not been told the official cause of Cormier’s death.)

According to Dr. Jim Garrow, Andrew Breitbart did not die from natural causes, but was killed by the Obama Administration.

ClancyBest-selling author of techno-military thrillers Tom Clancy died last week on Oct. 2 at the age of 66.

The New York Times said Clancy died at Johns Hopkins Hospital after a brief illness. But neither Clancy’s lawyer, J.W. Thompson Webb, nor his longtime publisher, Ivan Held, president of G. P. Putnam’s Sons, said they knew the precise cause of death. Under “cause of death” on Clancy’s autopsy is “cause of death unknown.”

When Clancy wrote The Hunt for Red October, he was met at the door by Pentagon officials and FBI agents demanding to know where he got top-secret documents. Dr. Garrow states that after the incident, the CIA “spoon fed” him classified information and scenarios to write his novels in a manner that was entertaining but contained that elements of truth. Garrow says that is why Clancy was killed because he was getting too close to a secret they don’t want the world to know.

Dr. Garrow states Obama had Tom Clancy killed as well, noting that it takes 5 days for plant toxins and most poisons to break down and leave no traces in the human body. Strangely (or not), doctors did not perform an autopsy on Clancy’s body for 5 days.

Garrow ended his radio interview with one last revelation.

He said the Obama administration is made up of Marxist Muslims who all take their orders from Senior Adviser to the President, Iranian-born Valerie Jarrett. Garrow said it is well known to intelligence agencies all over the world that Obama is a foreign plant who was placed on the path to the presidency by ultra-rich Saudi nationals. This is why all of Obama’s education records are permanently sealed.

H/t Clash Daily

See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

CIA expands Obama-approved training of Syrian militants

This is sheer insanity.

Obama is increasing training and weapons to so-called “moderate” rebels in the Syrian civil war, although those “moderates” are defecting to al-Qaeda jihadists by droves. Also, never forget that the head of the CIA, John Brennan, is himself a Muslim!

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

General Petraeus To Testify On Benghazi This Week

Yep, I’m going to beat Benghazi Like A Dead Horse.

DeadHorseTheoryamplido
OK,   This article looks like things are going to rock and roll when
General Petraeus Testifies this week. Seems he may have an ax to grind with skippy. I’d like to pull one paragraph out and highlight how Jay Carney answers a reporter’s question. It just amazes me how these people can say so much and not even come close to answering your question..LOL
I’ll run the whole story after the pull out. Am I confusing you? Cause I’m sure as heck confusing myself.   😀         ~ Steve~
OK,  This is reporter’s question.
“Again,” one newly curious reporter asked, “what role did the White House play, not just in making but in directing changes that took place to these?”
And this is Carneys response.
“Well,” the carney said, “thank you for that question. The way to look at this, I think, is to start from that week and understand that in the wake of the attacks in Benghazi, an effort was underway to find out what happened, who was responsible. In response to a request from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to the CIA, the CIA began a process of developing points that could be used in public by members of Congress, by members of that committee. And that process, as is always the case — again, led by the CIA — involved input from a variety of …”
Enough. You get the point: Full Spin Cycle.

 Just what in the hell is he saying? I know he did not answer the question, and seems he threw the C.I.A. under the bus. Now if memory serves who was the director of CIA at time of Benghazi? Hmmmm-

Watch out for Petraeus in Benghazi                    scandal

https://www.washingtontimes.com/staff/joseph-curl/

By their second term “inside the bubble,” presidents have completely lost touch with reality: Aides and confidants conspire to keep the chief executive insulated from the real world — the bad news, the worse press coverage. They think it’s their job, and lounging on the Oval Office couches, they nod along with the president’s every musing.
But this presidency has taken OOCS to new heights. Mr. Obama has only a few trusted aides, and occasional leaks from the West Wing show a paranoid president suspicious of nearly everyone around him. Supremely confident, convinced by the fawning minions at his feet that he is untouchable, the president dismisses all controversy as partisan attacks by an overzealous opposition. A pliant press corps of stenographers follows in lockstep.
Not surprisingly, every president in the past 60 years has had a major scandal in Term 2: Dwight Eisenhower had the U-2 “incident”; Richard Nixon had Watergate; Ronald Reagan had Iran-Contra; Bill Clinton had Monica (literally); George W. Bush had Katrina (and let’s not forget those WMDs that never turned up); and now, this president has Benghazi.
Make no mistake: Benghazi is a major scandal. Benghazi is a scandal before, during and after the terrorist attack that left four Americas dead, including an ambassador.
For months before, there were warnings about weak security at the U.S. Consulate in Libya; no one paid attention. During the attack, when Americans were begging for help, the White House ignored their pleas, sent no help.
And after? That’s when the Obama scandal falls into the predictable second-term pattern his predecessors all learned the very hard way. Faced with a crisis, the Obama White House panicked. “We can’t have a terrorist strike two months before Election Day, so … let’s not have a terrorist strike two months before Election Day.” Cue the Cover-Up.
So little is known about what happened in BenghaziWhere was the commander in chief that night? No pictures from the Situation Room this time. Why didn’t the Pentagon authorize a quick-response team to swoop in? Members of the military say they were ready — burning — to go. The call came in: Stand down. Let them die. There were dozens of witnesses to the attack that night: Where are they? What do they know? What really happened that night?
And who forced the heavy-handed redactions of those infamous “talking points,” the ones that sent Mr. Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations onto the Sunday talk shows to declare that the attack was just the culmination of a spontaneous protest over an anti-Islam video posted on YouTube?
Carnival barker Jay Carney looked almost ashen Friday as he took the podium to face a suddenly invigorated press corps. Of course, the public briefing came after a private session with “reporters who matter,” a sure sign the White House is in full hunker-down mode — and, more precisely, terrified.
“Again,” one newly curious reporter asked, “what role did the White House play, not just in making but in directing changes that took place to these?”
“Well,” the carney said, “thank you for that question. The way to look at this, I think, is to start from that week and understand that in the wake of the attacks in Benghazi, an effort was underway to find out what happened, who was responsible. In response to a request from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to the CIA, the CIA began a process of developing points that could be used in public by members of Congress, by members of that committee. And that process, as is always the case — again, led by the CIA — involved input from a variety of …”
Enough. You get the point: Full Spin Cycle.
Speaking for the White House, the flack said the CIA was fully to blame for the talking points. Fully. “That is what was generated by the intelligence community, by the CIA,” he said.
“Since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants.” That line was stricken: Everything was fine there — fine fine fine.
And: “We do know that Islamic extremists with ties to Al Qaeda participated in the attack.” That line, too, was deleted by … someone. Instead, this was inserted: “There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”
Despite protestations by the White House, this scandal is just beginning. And the White House has picked a very bad scapegoat: the Central Intelligence Agency. The CIA follows RFK’s edict: “Don’t get mad, get even.” And when the CIA gets even, it isn’t pretty.
With the White House putting all blame on the agency, expect push back this week — nuclear push back. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the former director forced to resign after a sex scandal, is a dangerous man to the Obama administration. Mad and intent on getting even, he’s already talking, telling one reporter the talking points were “useless” and that he preferred not to use them at all. The floodgates will open this week, and by the end of business Friday, the scandal will be full blown.

petraeus_web_20121112_0007_s160x146General (Retired) Petraeus

A warning to those West Wing sycophants suffering from acute OOCS: Don’t walk down any dark alleys.
Read more: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/12/curl-watch-out-petraeus-benghazi-scandal/?page=2#ixzz2TB1BiC00

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Benghazi Report, Talking Points Changed 12 Times. ABC News Reports.

Things on benghazi are really heating up. abc news has done a story showing 12 edits to original talking points memo. You can see edits at this link .                                              https://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57583988/emails-reveal-a-flurry-of-changes-to-benghazi-talking-points/                                     

I googled and just about every OTHER network has now reported on it.  Now this I believe is a good thing. It will not go quietly into the night. 

Now for my 2 cents. they may be reporting on it, but every story, and i mean every all throw State, the Cia,   

And STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESWOMAN VICTORIA NULAND under the bus.

US-JAPAN-DIPLOMACY-KERRY-KISHIDA

State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland 

They may be reporting on it , but still covering the jackass’s butt.

Not one reference anywhere to Skippy or white house at all. 

—————————————————————————————————-

   ABC Is Reporting………   

By Robert Laurie (Bio and Archives)  Friday, May 10, 2013

First, NBC outed Democrat attempts to destroy the Benghazi whistleblowers, now ABC News is shredding the official White House version of events. It’s starting to look like the President’s media lapdogs have finally been shamed into exposing their favorite administration.

n this case, ABC has revealed that they’ve received a whopping 12 different revisions of the Benghazi talking points. Their reporting makes it clear that the White House lied when it said the revisions were enacted predominantly by the intelligence community.
“When it became clear last fall that the CIA’s now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed, the White House said repeatedly the documents were put together almost entirely by the intelligence community, but White House documents reviewed by Congress suggest a different story
ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows on the Sunday after that attack.
BRAZIL-US-PATRIOTA-RICE

Susan Rice

White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department. The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.”
They even call Jay Carney out – by name – for telling a bald faced lie back in November.         Hehehehehehhee

Poor wittle Jay, him sad cause he in deep doo doo.

Poor wittle Jay, him sad cause he in deep doo doo.


“Those talking points originated from the intelligence community. They reflect the IC’s best assessments of what they thought had happened,” Carney said at the time. “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word “consulate’ to “diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.”
Bear in mind, this isn’t Fox News. This isn’t the National Review, TownHall, or even the crackpots at InfoWars. This is mainstream, Democrat-friendly, ABC News. We can all complain about how long it took the last horse to cross the finish line, but at least it’s managed to do so. Progressives can no longer claim that this “is a non-story” or that “only right wingers care.”
The story is becoming bigger and bigger, and not even the Obama-faithful can ignore it any longer.
We’ll see how long this new found love of reality lasts – and the smart money’s on ‘not long’- but if outlets like NBC and ABC have stopped carrying the President’s water on this matter, the wheels are truly coming off.
Here’s the ABC News piece, and you can read all of their reporting HERE.
CBS has a breakdown of the edits. You can read it   HERE

H/T Canada free press
https://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/55120

~Steve~

 

US-JAPAN-DIPLOMACY-KERRY-KISHIDA

State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland listens to US Secretary of State John Kerry and Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida speak to the press prior to a meeting at the State Department in Washington on February 22, 2013. Credit: AFP/Getty Images 

 

Please follow and like us:
0
 

13% of Americans believe Obama is the Antichrist

Antichrist2
Matt Berman reports for National Journal, April 2, 2013, that a new poll by Public Policy Polling found that 13% of registered American voters surveyed believe the POS is the Antichrist, while another 13% are not sure.
The poll of 1,247 registered American voters was conducted from March 27-30, 2013, through automated telephone interviews. The margin of error for the overall sample is +/-2.8%.

Some other findings of the poll (here’s the survey in pdf):

  • 4% of respondents believe shape-shifting reptilian people control our world by taking on human form and gaining power.
  • 5% of respondents believe Paul McCartney died and
    was secretly replaced in the Beatles in 1966.
  • 7% of those surveyed do not believe the moon landing was fake and that astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin had ever really landed on the moon.
  • 11% are not sure if Osama bin Laden indeed is dead. (Note from Eowyn: Bin Laden allegedly was killed by Navy SEAL Team 6 on May 2, 2011, although the Pentagon has no records of his death.)
  • 14% of respondents believe the CIA was “instrumental” in dealing crack cocaine into America’s inner cities in the 1980s.
  • 15% of those surveyed think the media or government add “secret mind-controlling technology” to TV broadcasts.
  • Only 25% of those surveyed think Lee Harvey Oswald had acted alone in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. 51% believe there was a larger conspiracy.
  • 28% of respondents think Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11; 51% don’t.
  • 28% of those surveyed believe that a “secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government, or New World Order.”
  • 37% of respondents said global warming is a hoax; 51% think it is not.
  • 44% of respondents believe the Bush administration intentionally misled the U.S. about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to promote the war; 45% said no.
~Eowyn
Please follow and like us:
0
 

Why is the Obama regime obsessed with zombies?

There’s a saying that when something happens once, it’s a fluke. Twice, we should start paying attention. Thrice, it’s no longer mere coincidence but is a definite pattern or trend. When it happens a FOURTH time, then we know something out of the ordinary definitely is going on!
This is the case with the Obama regime and zombies. Yes, zombies. The soul-less walking dead who inhabit the nightmarish world of horror movies. The walking dead who aren’t real, except to voodoo cultists like Obama’s mother-in-law Marian Robinson.

ONE

First, the U.S. federal government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in the name of education, published a tongue-in-cheek graphic novel, titled Preparedness 101: Zombie Pandemic, in March 2011, advising Americans on how to deal with a zombie apocalypse.

In the graphic novel, a “zombie pandemic” has taken place in the southeast of the United States. This is how the CDC describes Zombie Pandemic:
CDC has a fun new way of teaching about emergency preparedness. Our new graphic novel, “Preparedness 101: Zombie Pandemic” demonstrates the importance of being prepared in an entertaining way that people of all ages will enjoy. Readers follow Todd, Julie, and their dog Max as a strange new disease begins spreading, turning ordinary people into zombies. Stick around to the end for a surprising twist that will drive home the importance of being prepared for any emergency. Included in the novel is a Preparedness Checklist so that readers can get their family, workplace, or school ready before disaster strikes. Click on the image below to view the novella. A transcript can be found by clicking on the “accessible text” PDF. To order your own copy of the novella click here.
You can also read the comic on the CDC’s website.

TWO

Next, as reported by Christian Toto of Breitbart on Oct. 29, 2012, Hollyweird director Joss Wedon (“Avengers” and “Buffy the Vampire Slayer”) appeared in a video pimping for Obama. Whedon goes on the attack, saying a Romney administration will bring on “the zombie apocalypse”:

THREE

The same day, Oct. 29, 2012, the federal govt held a 5-day military exercise in San Diego to defend the United States against — you guessed it — a zombie apocalypse.

As reported by Julie Watson for the Associated Press, hundreds of Marines, Navy special ops, soldiers, police, firefighters and others participated in a counterterrorism summit, hosted by security firm Halo Corp, at a 44-acre Paradise Point Resort island in San Diego bay. The keynote speaker was former CIA Director Michael Hayden. The five-day summit was an approved training event by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Grant Program and the Urban Areas Security Initiative, which used precious taxpayer dollars to fund the $1,000 per person registration fee and coursework on everything from the battleground tactics to combat wounds to cybersecurity.
Called “Zombie Apocalypse,” the Halo exercise followed the CDC’s campaign launched in March 2011. In the scenario, a VIP and his personal detail are trapped in a village, surrounded by zombies when a bomb explodes. The VIP is wounded and his team must move through the town while dodging bullets and shooting back at the invading zombies. At one point, some members of the team are bit by zombies and must be taken to a field medical facility for decontamination and treatment.
As described by Brad Barker, president of Halo Corp: “This is a very real exercise, this is not some type of big costume party. “Everything that will be simulated at this event has already happened, it just hasn’t happened all at once on the same night. But the training is very real, it just happens to be the bad guys we’re having a little fun with. No one knows what the zombies will do in our scenario, but quite frankly no one knows what a terrorist will do. If a law enforcement officer sees a zombie and says, `Freeze, get your hands in the air!’ What’s the zombie going to do? He’s going to moan at you. If someone on PCP or some other psychotic drug is told that, the truth is he’s not going to react to you. No doubt when a zombie apocalypse occurs, it’s going to be a federal incident, so we’re making it happen.”
According to a report compiled by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who chairs the investigations subcommittee of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee:

The marquee event over the [San Diego] summit, however, was its highly-promoted “zombie apocalypse” demonstration. Strategic Operations, a tactical training firm, was hired to put on a “zombie-driven show” designed to simulate a real-life terrorism event. The firm performed two shows on Halloween, which featured 40 actors dressed as zombies getting gunned down by a military tactical unit. Conference attendees were invited to watch the shows as part of their education in emergency response training. […] According to the firm’s public relations manager, the exercise was brought about “utilizing Hollywood magic,” and setup in a “parking lot-sized movie set [with] state-of-the-art structures, pyrotechnic battlefield effects, medical special effects, vehicles and blank-firing weapons.”

Here’s a video of the Halo exercise (h/t The Examiner):

Why the zombie obsession?
Maybe “zombie” is a code word for something else?

FOUR

Sure enough, on the eve of the Nov. 6, 2012 presidential election, after Obama exhorted his supporters to “vote for revenge,” a Democrat activist website, RepublicanZombieDefense.com, released a vile “Get Out the Vote” ad in which Obama supporters use machine guns, grenades, garden shears, and chainsaws to maim, behead, and explode — you guessed it — brain-dead zombies.

The zombies are Mitt Romney supporters, i.e., Republicans and conservatives.


And so, now we know why the Obama regime is obsessed with zombies.
The Nazis had dehumanized Jews as vermin and bacillus before exterminating them. Dehumanizing — regarding another as less than or not human — makes it easier to kill that person. After all, we have no qualms killing bugs or worms or chickens or pigs or cows….
Draw your own conclusions as to what it means that the Obama regime and its acolytes dehumanize their political opponents as zombies, and repeatedly fantasize about killing those zombies.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Obama purges U.S. military command (Part 1)

Several days ago, FOTM’s lowtechgrannie posted a video of a media rarity — a reporter who doesn’t toe the party line and isn’t afraid to speak the truth. He’s Fox19 Cincinnati news anchor and investigative reporter Ben Swann.
At the end of the video, Swann noted that in the space of less than one month after the 7-hour Islamic terrorist attack of September 22, 2012, on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, four high-level U.S. military flag officers had been removed, for one ostensible reason or another. The four are Generals Petraeus, Allen, and Ham, and Admiral Gaouette. (In the U.S. military, flag officers are general officers in the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard of such senior rank that they are entitled to fly their own flags to mark where the officer exercises command.)
Swann withheld speculating on what this quite unprecedented attrition of senior U.S. military officers means. But this attrition cries out for some effort at explanation, no matter how speculative.

We’ll begin with the facts that we’ve been told.

1. General David Petraeus

Gen. Petraeus and Paula Broadwell

Gen. Petraeus and Paula Broadwell


A highly-decorated four-star general who had served over 37 years in the U.S. Army, 60-year-old David Petraeus had been Commander of the International Security Assistance Force; Commander of U.S. Forces Afghanistan; 10th Commander, U.S. Central Command; and Commanding General of Multi-National Force – Iraq who oversaw all coalition forces in Iraq.
On September 6, 2011, Obama recruited Petraeus to be Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. A week before, in anticipation of that appointment, Petraeus had retired from the U.S. Army.
Petraeus lasted 14 months as CIA director. On November 9, 2012, he resigned from the CIA, citing his extramarital affair with Paula Broadwell, a married woman who is the principal author of Petraeus’ biography, All In: The Education of General David Petraeus. Petraeus claims that the affair had begun in late 2011 when he was no longer an active duty military officer, and ended in the summer of 2012. The affair reportedly was discovered in the course of an FBI investigation into harassing emails that Broadwell had been sending to Jill Kelley, a Tampa socialite and a longstanding family friend of the Petraeuses whom Broadwell perceived to be a romantic rival.

2. General John R. Allen

Gen. Allen (l); Jill Kelley (r)

Gen. Allen (l); Jill Kelley (r)


A four-star general of the U.S. Marine Corps, 58-year-old General John Allen had succeeded Petraeus as Commander of U.S. Forces Afghanistan on July 18, 2011. He was nominated to be NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, pending confirmation by the United States Senate.
As part of the fallout of the Petraeus-Broadwell affair, correspondence between Allen and Jill Kelley also came to light. The FBI reportedly uncovered 20,000 to 30,000 pages of correspondence — mostly email — between Allen and Kelley from 2010 to 2012.  Reportedly, their correspondence was “flirtatious” and “inappropriate” as Allen and Kelley are both married, but not to each other. (Good grief. How could a 4-star general even have so much free time as to write 20,000 to 30,000 emails in the space of two years to ANYONE?)
On November 13, 2012, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta suspended Allen’s confirmation hearing, pending investigations into the general’s “inappropriate communication” with Kelley. Panetta also requested Congress to speed the confirmation of General Joseph Dunford to take over as commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. In effect, not only will Allen not be promoted, he has lost his present command post in Afghanistan.

3. General Carter F. Ham

U.S. Army General Carter Ham

A well-decorated U.S. Army general, 60-year-old Ham became Commander of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) on March 8, 2011.
U.S. AFRICOM is one of nine Unified Combatant Commands of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). As one of six that are regionally focused, AFRICOM is devoted solely to Africa. James S. Robbins of The Washington Times writes that Gen. Ham “is a very well regarded officer who made AFRICOM into a true Combatant Command after the ineffective leadership of his predecessor, General William E. ‘Kip’ Ward.”
On October 18, 2012, in a DoD news briefing, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced that Gen. Ham was relieved fired: “Today I am very pleased to announce that President Obama will nominate Army Gen. David Rodriguez to succeed Gen. Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command.”
According to Joint doctrine, “the tour length for combatant commanders and Defense agency directors is three years.” But Gen. Ham had only been in the commander position at AFRICOM for a year and a half and the informal word was that he wasn’t scheduled to rotate out until March 2013.
Pat Dollard of BareNakedIslam claims that the scuttlebutt is that, on September 11, 2012, Gen. Ham had received the same e-mails the White House received — from our people in Benghazi, requesting help/support as the terrorist attack was taking place. Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had the unit ready. Dollard writes:

“General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.”

Gen. Ham’s “second in command” is not named. The Pentagon’s official line is that Ham had retired.

4. Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette

Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette

Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette


The recipient of various personal decorations and unit awards, including the Vice Admiral James Bond Stockdale Award for inspirational leadership in 2003, Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette was promoted to Commander of Carrier Strike Group 3 (aka John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group) in April 2012.
Carrier Strike Group 3 is one of five U.S. Navy carrier strike groups currently assigned to the U.S. Pacific Fleet. U.S. Navy carrier strike groups are employed in a variety of roles that involve gaining and maintaining sea control and projecting power ashore, as well as projecting naval airpower ashore.
The aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis is the strike group’s current flagship, and as of 2012, other units assigned to Carrier Strike Group 3 include Carrier Air Wing Nine; the guided-missile cruisers USS Mobile Bay and USS Antietam; and the ships of Destroyer Squadron 21, the guided-missile destroyers USS Wayne E. Meyer, USS Dewey, USS Kidd, and USS Milius.
Carrier Group Three formed the core of the naval power during the initial phase of Operation Enduring Freedom in 2001. “Operation Enduring Freedom” is the official name used by the U.S. government for the War in Afghanistan, together with a number of smaller military actions, under the umbrella of the Global “War on Terror”. On 16 July 2012, the U.S. Department of Defense announced that the scheduled deployment of Carrier Strike Group Ten was advanced by four months, with its anticipated area of operation shifting from the U.S. Seventh Fleet in the Western Pacific to the U.S. Fifth Fleet in the Persian Gulf and North Arabian Sea. On 27 August 2012, four months ahead of schedule, Carrier Strike Group Three departed for an eight-month deployment to the U.S. Fifth Fleet under the command of Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette.
On October 27, 2012, the commander of the U.S. Fifth Fleet, Vice Admiral John W. Miller, ordered the temporary re-assignment of Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette pending the results of an investigation by the Naval Inspector General. Gaouette’s chief of staff, Captain William C. Minter, will lead the strike group until the arrival of Rear Admiral Troy M. (“Mike”) Shoemaker, who will assume command of the strike group.
Tom Lombardo writes for the Navy Times, Oct. 27, 2012, that Adm. Gaouette was relieved, mid-deployment, and is accused of “inappropriate leadership judgment,” according to a Navy official familiar with the case. Gaouette was told to go home — to return to the Carrier Strike Group’s homeport in Bremerton, Washington, until the investigation is complete.

There you have it. Within two months after the Benghazi attack, four senior U.S. military officers were purged:

  • Gen. Ham, on October 18.
  • Adm. Gaouette, on October 27.
  • Gen. Petraeus, on November 9.
  • Gen. Allen, on November 13.

Ostensibly, Petraeus’ “retirement” and Allen’s suspended promotion are due to both men’s moral conduct. But surely we are not so naive as to think that Petraeus and Allen are the only U.S. military officers who’ve ever committed adultery or written flirtatious email. As for Ham’s “retirement” and Gaouette’s “temporary re-assignment” (reassignment to what?), there is not even a whisper that either man’s morals or personal conduct is at issue.
So what should we make of all this? Is it all just coincidence or something more sinister?
Ann Barnhardt, in her blog of Nov. 13, 2012, calls it Obama’s “night of the long knives.”
The last step in Hitler’s quest for total, dictatorial power was the purging of the German military of any factions that were in any way autonomous and not 100% loyal to him, specifically the SA (Sturmabteilung or Storm Detachment). The SA was run by Ernst Rohm. On June 30, 1934, the “Night of the Long Knives” was executed when Hitler had Rohm and the rest of the SA leaders killed. Hitler publicly explained that the purge was executed because of sexual perversion in the ranks of the SA who were “plotting” against him.
Barnhardt writes:

And now, the Obama putsch regime is purging them and anyone else they deem to be a threat. It won’t surprise me if Petraeus is indeed court martialed and stripped of his pension, because that is what the rest of the flag officer corps fears more than death. Make an example of Petraeus, and maybe Allen, and that will whip the rest of them into line.

This process of a totalitarian oligarchy constantly purging its own ranks in fits of paranoia and demands for total personal loyalty is as old as the hills. Lenin and Stalin eventually murdered almost every person that entered their inner-circles. Same with Mao. Same with Saddam Hussein. Same with the three Kims in North Korea. Beyond the Night of the Long Knives, Hitler was also having his own people killed continuously.

Just as the Night of the Long Knives in ’34 was just the beginning, so too is this situation in the former American republic just the beginning.

Writing for Veterans Today, Gordon Duff has an even more provocative take on the four military officers:

The decision [to fire Admiral Gaouette] was made based on a conversation with the Secretary of Defense who, at the end of the talk, believed Gaouette was part of a group of military officers who have been under suspicion for planning a “Seven Days in May” type overthrow of the US government if President Obama is re-elected.

This is not conjecture, dozens of key officers face firing, hundreds are under investigation, all with direct ties to extremist elements in the Republican Party and the Israeli lobby.

Reports received are sourced at the highest levels of the Pentagon and indicate that the administration has been aware of these plans for months.

Whatever the truth, one thing of which we can be sure is that the firings of three generals and an admiral have something (or everything) to do with the Benghazi attack. It’ll be interesting if the newly-elected 113th U.S. Congress will conduct serious investigations and hearings on Benghazi, although Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Florida) is already on record as being opposed to an independent investigation.
I wouldn’t hold my breath….
Click here for Part 2 of “Obama purges U.S. military command”.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0