The Occam’s Razor Behind The “Coordinated” Benghazi Attack – Answers To The Confusion

Weapons of Misdirection

Virtually everyone is twisting into pretzel like contortions trying to figure out what caused the apparent confusion, chaos, misinformation and mistakes between the White House and the State Department in the Benghazi attack that led to the death of Libyan Ambassador Stevens, aide Sean Smith, and former SEAL’s Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.

Jennifer Ruben does a great job recently outlining the machinations HERE.

[…] Moreover, the State Department now confesses there was no protest at all outside the Libyan installation before the attack.

That’s awfully problematic, given that Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice went on five talk shows suggesting in fact that the movie did provoke the attack. Mitt Romney’s top foreign policy adviser, Richard Williamson, told Right Turn, “Last time I checked, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations was part of the U.S. State Department.”    (article)

However, we think possibly we have been able to piece it all together will a little research and dot connecting from the archives.   When you step back you realize the big picture is not what it seems at all.

Benghazi was not an assassination attempt, it was a botched kidnapping.

In order to understand you need to find all the bits of the puzzle.   That’s where so much of our previous site research comes in handy.   Back in March of 2011 we were closely monitoring reports of al-Qaeda jihadist activity in/around Benghazi Libya.   Then in December of 2011 we noted a specific number of Libyan al-Qaeda operatives had been organized under the direction of Head Banana Ayman Al Zawahiri and reported by CNN.

[…]  The jihadists include one veteran fighter who had been detained in Britain on suspicion of terrorism. The source describes him as committed to al Qaeda’s global cause and to attacking U.S. interests.  The source told CNN that the al Qaeda leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, personally dispatched the former British detainee to Libya earlier this year as the Gadhafi regime lost control of large swathes of the country.

The man arrived in Libya in May and has since begun recruiting fighters in the eastern region of the country, near the Egyptian border. He now has some 200 fighters mobilized, the source added. Western intelligence agencies are aware of his activities, according to the source.

Another al Qaeda operative, of dual European-Libyan nationality, was arrested in an unnamed country on his way to Libya from the Afghan-Pakistan border region.  (report)

Coincidentally the number of al-Qaeda operatives who are reported to have attacked the Consulate in Benghazi was estimated around 200.

Just before the beginning of the Libyan uprising the brother of Ayman Al Zawahiri, Muhammed Al Zawahiri, was released from prison in Egypt.  He also carries an understandable chip on his shoulder toward the U.S. considering we used black operations in Saudi Arabia to identify his contacts.

In 1999, security forces picked up Mohamed Al Zawahiri in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), where he had settled with his family and was working as an engineer for a construction company.

He claims UAE authorities tortured him for four months — at the behest of the CIA — in an attempt to extract information about his brother. During that time, Zawahiri says, he offered to mediate between his brother and the West, something he believes could have prevented the Sept.11 attacks, but his overtures were rebuffed by UAE officials.

In 1999, he was extradited to Egypt to face terrorism charges related to Sadat’s assassination and conspiracy to topple the regime — charges he denies, but he was jailed by Mubarak in Egypt.   He was later acquitted upon appeal, but Mubarak refused to let him leave prison.   He remained in jail until March of 2011 when he was released.

Zawahiri spent the following five years in solitary confinement in Egypt’s notorious underground prisons. There, in a 6-by-6-foot cell with no access to sunlight, he says, he was repeatedly waterboarded, electrocuted, and subjected to sleep deprivation.  (Report)

Muhammed is the guy who organized the protest at the US embassy in Cairo on 9/11/12 (See video above). Muhammad’s release was made possible by the newly legal influence of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt when Hosni Mubarak was on the ropes.

M. Zawahiri clearly tells Nick Robertson from CNN on the morning of 9/11 exactly what the protest was about:  The demand for the release of the Blind Sheik.

It was not a disrespectful U-Tube video of the Prophet Mohammed that kicked off the Cairo protest.   It was a Demand for the release of  Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, The Blind Sheik.

Remember all the “chatter” about the possibility of the Blind Sheik being released the week after the Benghazi attack ?

The U.S. State Department is actively considering negotiations with the Egyptian government for the transfer of custody of Omar Abdel-Rahman, also known as “the Blind Sheikh,” for humanitarian and health reasons, a source close to the Obama administration told TheBlaze.

“Chatter” is what happens within intelligence circles when a specific name becomes the mention of some discussion – but the persons overhearing the discussion don’t quite know what the subject matter of consequence is all about.

Why the “chatter” on Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman?   Bear with me…..

Lets pause and just reflect on what we do know as fact at this moment in the discussion.

      • Ayman Al Zawahiri dispatched al-Qaeda operatives into Libya.
      • Brother Muhammed Al Zawahiri was free in Egypt, and coordinated a protest at the Cairo embassy on 9/11/12.
      • The Cairo Embassy protest was about the Blind Shiek being released, not a movie.
      • Immediately following the Benghazi attack U.S. intelligence sources were hearing chatter within their intelligence circles about the name of the Blind Sheik.

OK, so we continue.  Lets look on the ground in Benghazi, Libya just after the Cairo Embassy protest got out of control on 9/11.

We know there was at least two probative attacks on the consulate grounds prior to 9/11.  One of them with an IED detonation test to breach the protective wall.  We know the Libyan police (Militia) were warned by their families to leave the consulate area in advance of the attack beginning.   The neighborhood knew something was about to happen.

We know with certainty there was no protest outside the U.S. Consulate, that day.  We know the attack began around 8:30 pm after the Turkish diplomatic corp left the compound following their meeting with Ambassador Stevens.   We know from Fran Townsend with CNN the attack took place over a period of six hours;  We know there were approximately 200 terrorists engaged in the attack;  We know the total of Libyan and US security forces were 10 or 11 armed guards inside the compound.   We know that RPG’s were used at the consulate, and at least one 23mm anti-aircraft type weapon was fired into the buildings.

There are numerous reports the Libyan police officer assigned to Ambassador Stevens pointed out where he was hiding within the compound.   But we do know as fact that Steven’s aide Chris Smith was dead when Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods and the rescue team from the Annex arrived.  And we know they were unable to locate Ambassador Stevens; but located and removed over 20 consulate employees back to the Annex building approximately a half mile away before they again came under attack, this time including mortar rounds.

We know that Ambassador Stevens body was dragged from a window opening in his safe room and the door was still sealed when reporters first arrived post attack.

We also know that Ambassador Steven’s body was missing for approximately 8 hours from the time the rescue team evacuated the Annex until sometime the following day when his lifeless body turned up in a local hospital.

All of these facts have been confirmed by US intelligence sources, and reported in various media outlets with confirmations.   We also know from reporters that even though there was fire inside the consulate buildings there was no surrounding ground fire evidence noted other than on vehicles.

Question:  So why did the attack take place over 6 hours for a team of over 200 heavily armed bad guys outnumbering defensive security more than 20:1?   And if their intention was to KILL Ambassador Stevens then why did they spend so much time trying to get him out?    Why kill his aide immediately, but not him?

Once they took over the compound, which according to recent reports was only minutes after 8:30pm when they began, if their intent was a kill mission they would have been in and gone in a matter of moments;  surely in less than an hour, and all the consulate employees could have easily been slaughtered.

Something doesn’t add up.

However, IF you connect the dots between the Cairo Embassy protest and the Benghazi Consulate attack you realize what becomes the biggest probability.   The al-Qaeda goal was to kidnap Ambassador Chris Stevens and ransom him back to the U.S. in exchange for Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman.

Under that scenario everything begins to make sense.

It makes sense of how the attack took place.   It makes sense of how long it took because their goal was to keep him alive.  It makes sense of the how the people were responding in the video of Ambassador Stevens being removed from the building.   It makes sense of why his body was missing.  It also makes sense of the post-attack “chatter”.

It certainly makes sense of how the State Dept and White House were FUBAR’d if word of the real motivation, and real reason, ever got out.  It makes sense of why there was no real rush to put investigators on the scene, perhaps it even makes sense of why the families of he victims have not been given the results of the autopsy’s performed at Andrews Air Force Base.

It also explains why all the divergent stories were quickly concocted to obfuscate and distract from the reality of a U.S. ambassador dying.  Because the reportedly eliminated al-Qaeda just attempted a bold kidnapping of a U.S. Representative to trade for a convicted terrorist The Blind Sheik.

In an election year.

Ring any historical bells?

1979

2012 ?

Why Are We Being Lied Too?

This entry was posted in Benghazi-Gate, Clinton(s), Death Threats, Egypt & Libya Part 2, Election 2012, Islam, media bias, Obama re-election, Obama Research/Discovery, Sept 11, Tip Line, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to The Occam’s Razor Behind The “Coordinated” Benghazi Attack – Answers To The Confusion

  1. John Galt says:

    Can we please stop supporting radical islamists now?

    Like

    • lovemygirl says:

      It is like paying for a prostiitute and expecting love in return.

      Like

      • waltherppk says:

        Settle for some very professionally expressed affection …love takes time, and practice makes perfect…practice practice practice …there’s just no substitute for practice. Do you love me yet ? ….hmmm I’m not sure ……let’s work on that.

        Like

  2. boricuafudd says:

    When I heard the first reports, my first thoughts were the Embassy in Tehran, and the hostage crisis. The burning of the Consulate struck me as odd, I understood the vehicles, but the building itself? It seemed to me that the papers and other documents would be more valuable. Then the reports came in that the Ambassador’s aide was dead and the Ambassador was missing, I thought, okay they were smoking them out, and now they have the Ambassador.

    In the following days when some of the pictures came out and you saw the terrorists walking around with the RPG’s but just circling not engaged in anything, I thought it was odd as well, but if they were waiting around for the Ambassador to come out, it now makes sense. I didn’t understand why the other personnel, were it seemed allowed to escape, of course if your target is trapped, then is understandable. I think when the Ambassador did not come out, and the rest of security forces came and got the guard to take him to the safe house, is when they decided to attack there. In case the Ambassador had somehow gotten away, once they got the information that he was not there is when they returrned to the consulate, broke the window and found the Ambassador, near death, the video we all have probably seen.

    Like

    • How come you never heard any reports about “dead bad guys”? Surely some of the attackers were killed if a defense was mounted.

      Like

      • boricuafudd says:

        Excellent point, that is what I mean once the location of the Ambassador was established, they did not continued the attack. The security forces seemed more interested in getting everyone else out, and they were allowed.

        Later as reinforcements came to get the guard in the roof and the Ambassador, the terrorist re-grouped and proceeded to the safe house, where the 2 Seals were killed, once they established that the Ambassador was not at the safe house, they went back and found him.

        I would love to see the 50 minute video, that some government agency has (CIA).

        Like

        • waltherppk says:

          When two seals are killed and it was not an ambush or an inside job or some other untypical circumstance …..there should be a substantial body count of bad guys. Seals are very lethal in combat mode….and I would expect the bad guys took some casualties.. it would seem odd if they did not …then why not.

          Like

    • lovemygirl says:

      That also would explain why they would be happy he was alive. Dead hostages are less valuable commodities.

      Like

  3. James F says:

    Wouldn’t it have been something for President Obama to have negotiated the release of a kidnapped US Ambassador being held hostage right before the election?

    Very reminiscent of the original ‘October Surprise.’

    I won’t go further into conspiracy theory territory but it does make one wonder.

    Like

    • ftsk420 says:

      But would Obama have handed over a terrorists in exchange for an American. I thought America didn’t give into that sort of thing. I don’t get into politics but I don’t think Obama would be dumb enough to do that. Then again he isn’t all that bright to begin with.

      Like

      • Sharon says:

        “America” and “Obama” are two entirely different entities.

        No, America does not give in to that sort of thing.

        Obama would, in a heartbeat, if he thought he could please his friends in so doing.

        Like I said, two completely different entities.

        Like

        • waltherppk says:

          Obama AKA Barry Soetoro is foreign agent tasked with the destruction of the republic and he is basked financed and empowered by Red China. The election campaign for Obama is and appendage and apparatus of the Chinese government, a private representative of which has personally visited Obama in the White House 21 times. That representative is an American expatriate who has lived in Shanghai for decades and is the channel for funds and message from the Chinese government to Obama. Obama is a de facto operative and hired agent of the communist party of China. Obama is not just a Marxist but is a communist, just like the family from which he was spawned. Obama is a pinko rat and his supporters are domestic enemies and traitors to the republic.

          Like

          • Sharon says:

            I have no problem with the bottom line/the last sentence. Do you have details on him being a hired agent of the communist party of China? That would b e interesting to see.

            Like

            • waltherppk says:

              The meteoric rise of Obama has got to the affirmative action success story of all time and it was the intellectual and ideological excellence of Obama as some kind of community organizing mastermind that made his rocket rise to power possible. The rails were being greased for Obama by a foreign state, with adequate resources put at his disposal to accomplish all the black and commie rabble rousing his little red commie heart could imagine. The guy has the pedigree of a junkyard dog and has surrounded himself with communists and thugs every step of the way. One way or another that domestic enemy’s ambitions are going to come to an end. If the electorate doesn’t get rid of him in a civilized way then there probably would be a Chinese secret police detail put on him to protect him. No military man who is an oath keeper should even be paying any attention to that red commie lying traitor or his staff of equally evil turncoats. He should be thrown in the damn brig along with Biden ….November won’t wait for those POS’s. No time like the present. Maybe fast and furious guns killed the ambassador ..like hundreds of other people whose blood is on the hands of these pinko prog traitors.

              Like

  4. Pingback: Bambi Spokescrunt Steph Cutter: "Benghazi is only an issue because of... - NY Sports Day Forums

  5. Mikado Cat says:

    I’ve been wondering about that, nothing I’ve seen makes any mention of attackers casualties.

    Please clarify the issue regarding fire. What I read was that fuel was poured around the buildings and set fire to create thick smoke. I can see how that could be used to smoke them out, but isn’t it more likely to kill everyone?

    It just seems to me a snatch operation would have been done much differently.

    Also really odd to me, a six hour fire fight and NO MESSAGE got out to anybody for help, and/or no help arrived?

    Like

    • boricuafudd says:

      The Ambassador was locked in a safe room, behind iron gates, that could only be opened from the inside iron bars on windows, as well, smoking him out would be sound like a good strategy. Only the Ambassador, his aide Smith, and a bodyguard were inside.

      According to the testimony yesterday, help came and got both the bodyguard who had opened a window and climbed to the roof to escape the flames and the body of the Aide were recovered by them. They were taken to the safe house half a mile away, where they were attacked again.

      Like

    • The question of the external fire was one that took some time to research. However, on 10/9/12 in an interview with the CNN reporter (Ali something?) she discussed the Diesel fuel issue and fires. According to her on the ground report the fires were obvious from inside the building, however other than vehicles burning there was nothing noted to appear like fuel “poured” around on on the ground. The internals of the buildings were torched, but not the exterior.

      on 10/10/12 again on CNN (AC 360 show) Fran Townsend discussed the length of the firefight in detail. Yes, it was odd to her that over such an extended period of time while communication between the consulate and intelligence/security was taking place, no rescue attempt was mounted….

      However, if you consider the firefight actually moved from the consulate to the Annex it makes sense the rescue was directed to the annex and not the consulate. What was happening, at the consulate, during the time the Annex was the source of attention is the aspect that deserves inquiry.

      I don’t want to get bogged down in “rabbit holes”, and prefer to stay away from conspiracy theory, instead focusing on what FACTUAL evidence presents itself. Each point creates a dot, each dot connects to draw a picture, when you stand back the picture is clearer.

      Like

  6. drkate says:

    So my question is, who bought out the contract to kidnap the ambassador and decide to rape, torture and murder him? Because that is what happened, someone decided to kill the ambassador and not keep him alive. Someone got wind of Obama’s plans and fucked them up purposely

    Like

    • There are many questions. Many questions. That can lead to ‘theory’ about motive. I have my own possibilities but prefer to focus on what is actually provable.

      The Alex Jones crowd might quickly draw a picture of a successful kidnapping and intradiciion by US intelligence to thwart the agenda and that activity ultimately lead to Steven’s death. Who knows, maybe that is a possibility…. but that’s what investigations are for.

      Like

      • retire2005 says:

        sundancecracker, one question you did not ask remains unaswered: why was Steven in Benghazi, known as the biggest hot-spot in Libya, on the eleventh anniversary of September 11, 2001? That is not an unimportant fact that needs to go ignored.

        Stevens was obviously there due to a impending deal to recoup weapons that were determined to have found their way into the hands of terrorists. Now, we know that both Egypt and France provided the Libyan rebels with weapons in the days leading up to the removal of Gaddafi, but why would the U.S. be trying to cut a deal for THOSE weapons? Why was a former SEAL there to try to determine exactly who it was that was in possession of those weapons?

        So I am going to throw this at you; WE, THE U.S. provided those weapons. Now, I know that the Obama administration claims we never supplied weapons to the Libyan rebels, only approve the supply by both France and Egypt. But I don’t buy that for one minute. I think the U.S., via Obama, supplied weapons to those OBAMA though were freedom seeking rebels who were battling an oppressive Gaddafi and those weapons were now in the hands of al Qaeda and that cat was about to claw its way out of the bag.

        Think about that for a minute and add the fact that we now have troops in Jordan. Obama intends to leave a big foot print in the Middle East, but not in the way we, the Americans, would do. He thought his glowing personality would change the temperature in Middle Eastern nations, but has learned they don’t give a damn about his problem with Dunning-Kruger effect. Obama wanted to be The Won who brought about the ousting of men he viewed as tyrants, and the whole world would sing his praises. What better way to do that than to arm rebels who will help carry out his nefarious plans? Only the problem became the weapons wound up in the hands of al Qaeda and Stevens was tasked with getting them back.

        We already know that Obama is backing the Syrian rebels, yet the Guardian is reporting that the Syrians are deserting the Free Syrian Army in favor of AQ.

        Like

        • retire, I think it is an absolute certainty that the actual manufacturer of the weapons used in the Benghazi attack could be traced to US sales. You are 100%. The weapons Hillary worked to help the “rebels” are indeed part of the al-Qaeda weapons depots right now.

          In addition. Last year we documented the President of Chad giving specific information about the Gaddafi Surface To Air Missiles being transported by AQIM through his country. So the North Africans have massive amounts of SAM’s from there. Those Weapons were transported from Libya, through Africa, and onto boats headed East to Yemen… so you don’t only have Libyan arms in Libya, Egypt, Africa, and Mexico. They made it all the way to Yemen.

          No doubt the arms used against the consulate were U.S. made weapons given to the Rebels under the auspices of R2P (responsibility to protect) the United Nations/Obama doctrine. Which, in my opinion, is now and always has been insufferably ridiculous policy.

          Like

          • retire2005 says:

            Thank you for your response. When Dennis Kuchinich asked Lt. Col. Wood and Nordstrom how many missiles were in Libya that were capable of taking down a passenger airliner, and the answer was 10-20,000, it took my breath away. Both Wood and Norstrom said that AQ was more establish in Libya than we are.

            So my impression is that Benghazi was nothing more than Fast and Furious, Middle East Style. Another policy of Barack Obama gone horribly wrong.

            A week ago, Leon Panetta admitted that the U.S. has lost track of [some of] Syria’s WMDs. Now, no one is talking about two things; how Syria obtained those WMDs, and when. It is my belief that those WMDs are from Saddam’s stockpile that was transferred to Syria in the days leading up to the beginning of American intervention in Iraq. You know, the WMDs that, according to the American press, didn’t exist and the non-existant WMDs the lapdog media beat George Bush up over for at least four years.

            I cannot tell you how I know this; but Yemen is the next country to watch closely. There are real problems there and when the shite hits the fan, Obama is going to act so surprised. The headline will read “Obama is shocked. Shocked, we tell you, that there is terrorist activities going on in Yemen.”

            One other mistake I think the Administration is making; they are trying to blame the story line put out about Benghazi on the backs of the CIA. “It was the intel we had at the time” they are saying, trying to dump the blame on poor work by the spooks and consequently, General Betrayus. But that is a major mistake because Gen. Petrayus, nay, all the spooks, are just one phone call away from Jake Tapper.

            Like

  7. drkate says:

    And of course, Obama trading the ambassador for the blind sheik would have further gutted our foreign policy—where we never negotiate with terrorists. The floodgate would have opened for kidnapping Americans all over the world.

    Like

    • boricuafudd says:

      I think you are forgetting the power of a good spin, the ground had been seeded by the reports of sending the Sheik for humanitarian reasons. Suppose, and this is hypothetical, that in exchange for the Sheik, the militias in Libya surrender their arms, bringing stability for Libya and that Egypt would sign some meaningless treaty with the US,or Israel, plus we get the Ambassador alive?
      It would look like a coup, stabilizes the area, puts the Muslim Brotherhood who brokered the deal in a good light, both here and in Egypt for getting the Sheik released. Of course, they would accept that deal.

      Like

  8. gretchenone says:

    There were reports about threats against Ambassador Stevens in the weeks before the attack: From the Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2211736/U-S-consulate-Libya-attacked-twice-9-11-anniversary-jihadists-issued-threats-Facebook.html: “The letter, obtained by the site, says that both the consulate and Stevens were prime terror targets because threats had been made against both on Facebook. One such post mentioned the route that Stevens took on his morning jog, prompting the diplomat to briefly stop running for his own safety.”

    If it was a conspiracy to kidnap the ambassador and trade him for the blind sheik, or have him rescued to show Obama’s foreign policy mastery, it is breathtaking in its arrogance and stupidity, and satanic evil.

    Like

  9. stellap says:

    Thanks for posting the Lara Logan video. It’s very powerful. I highly recommend that everyone watch it!

    Like

  10. sybiljx1 says:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/9602439/Libya-British-guns-unaccounted-for-after-Benghazi-consulate-attack.html

    Libya: British guns unaccounted for after Benghazi consulate attack

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2216397/Missing-British-guns-US-consulate-Libya-seized-extremists.html

    Missing British guns from US consulate in Libya ‘could have been seized by extremists’ one month after site was destroyed

    Foreign Office withdrew from Libyan city in June after assassination attempt
    American-British agreement to leave weapons and vehicles at compound
    Attack last month in Benghazi killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Steven

    Like

  11. John Galt says:

    Biden’s Jokeresque facial expressions while Ryan speaks strike me as inappropriate and bizarre.

    Like

  12. Pingback: Benghazi: Was it Clinton or Obama? | Scanned Retina Blog

  13. sp2012 says:

    HOKEY CRAP! Do you smell a rat, I smelled it 4 years ago!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s