Libya was safer under Gaddafi

Libya: Investigators fear pursuing Benghazi case for fear of being kidnapped by jihadis

An indication of just who is in the driver’s seat in the new Libya. “Reprisal fears cloud Libya probe into US consulate attack,” from AFP, January 6 (thanks to JW):

AFP – Libya is pushing forward with its investigation into the deadly September 11 attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, but fear of retaliation by Islamist extremists has proved a hurdle.Security reports point to the possible involvement of an Al-Qaeda-linked Islamist group in the attack that killed ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, a source close to the case told AFP.

Therefore the case frightens local investigators, especially given the increased pace of assassinations targeting military and police officers in the east of the country,” said the source in the criminal investigations department.

The case has now been passed to a judge based in the capital.

“Judge Khaled al-Turki from Tripoli was appointed last week to complete investigations into the case,” said a senior justice ministry official….

Benghazi-based analyst and political science professor Khaled al-Marmimi said: “Investigators are afraid to keep probing the case because they are concerned extremists will kidnap them at any moment.

The authorities are ignoring the presence of Islamist extremists in the region. They are keeping silent on the issue and have not engaged them in any dialogue.“…

Mutaz al-Majbari, chief editor of a private Libyan television station, said: “The authorities want to expedite the case so they do not face American interference in the questioning of subjects like in Tunisia.”

A Tunisian suspected of playing a role in the attack, Abdelbasset Ben Mbarek, refused to be interrogated by FBI agents in December, according to his lawyer, who slammed what he called US interference in the probe….

Flashing red lies of Benghazi

Canada Free Press

Late on Sunday, December 30, 2012, under the cover of the holiday weekend, the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs quietly released their investigative report of the attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans. The 29-page investigative report titled Flashing Red, additional to the State Department’s own Accountability Review Board’s (ARB) report, was released by Committee Chairman Joseph Lieberman and Ranking Committee member Susan Collins.

 The report contains ten “findings,” eleven “recommendations,” 117 heavily redacted footnotes and even a prominent mention of the dialogue between Barack Hussein Obama and Joy Behar of The View. The conclusion reached by this report is a mere six sentences long, ultimately determining that the Benghazi deaths are “a tragic reminder that the fight our country is engaged in with Islamist extremists and terrorists is not over,” and that the U.S. government failed to protect its public servants in Benghazi.

Most Americans will recall that Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Susan Rice, Jay Carney and others under the direct control of the Chief Executive immediately identified a little-known video as the motive for the attack in Benghazi, and the existence of a crowd of protestors motivated by anti-American sentiment gathered outside of the “embassy” or “consulate” in Benghazi due to this video. This is one of the most critically important aspects to the official version of events in Benghazi as well as the events that followed at the highest levels of our government.Contradictions and liesAs fully expected, the majority of the findings and subsequent recommendations in this report directly relate to security of the physical assets and personnel in Libya. These are deliberate deflections to divert attention away from certain key elements, including but not limited to identifying those who were behind the attacks and their motive. The most critical aspect of this investigation that would provide the context necessary to understand what took place in Benghazi on September 11, 2102, was missing from this report: the reasons that Obama and certain members of his administration deliberately withheld and even purposely misrepresented the facts to the families of the slain victims and the American people collectively.

The video is the metaphorical “smoking gun” in the intentional cover-up implemented at the highest levels of our government. Its importance is comparable to the Nixon tapes of the Watergate era, or the infamous blue dress in the Clinton scandal. Despite its importance as the cornerstone of an immense cover-up not seen since the Watergate era, this report not only downplays its significance, but allows obvious factual contradictions to exist unimpeded. It is unconscionable that any investigative inquiry with a genuine intent on uncovering the truth in the murders of four Americans would avoid pursuing this issue as exhibited in this report.

The video was referenced four times within this report, with the most important reference appearing on page four as follows (Washington timeline of 9/11):

“From 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. EST, Secretary Panetta met with senior DOD officials to discuss the Benghazi attack and other violence in the region in reaction to the anti-Muslim video.”

Having the benefit of retrospect alone, it is unthinkable that this report fails to question the truthfulness of this assertion which we now know cannot be true. The veracity of this claim becomes even more absurd when it’s now known with absolute certainty that the Benghazi compound was  not an embassy, consulate, or even an overtly obvious diplomatic mission. The facts now prove that this compound was operating “under the radar” for non-diplomatic purposes, a fact that was well known to Panetta, Clinton and others.

Accordingly, there could not have been a protest of any kind at this location. By deliberately and incorrectly calling the Benghazi compound an embassy (initially) and later a consulate, the deception was further advanced to allow for the possibility of a protest. This is not an act of omission by elected and appointed officials, but one of commission. Yet the investigative report fails to address this deception for what it is by outright dismissing this deliberate lie with the concession that the attacks in Benghazi were, in fact, terrorist attacks.

This absolute deceptions relative to the video, the alleged protest in Benghazi, and the ultimate murders of four Americans were dismissed on page 23 of this report by the following statement:

“In short, regardless of questions about whether there had been a demonstration or protest outside the Temporary Mission Facility in advance of the attack, the extent to which the attacks were preplanned, or the role of an anti-Islamic video which had sparked protests at the U.S. embassy in Cairo and elsewhere earlier on September 11th, there was never any doubt among key officials, including officials in the IC and the Department of State, that the attack in Benghazi was an act of terrorism.”

In one single run-on sentence, the report of investigation blatantly dismisses the deception of the Obama administration relative to the video and nature of the compound by merely admitting that the event in Benghazi was indeed a terrorist attack. The report further gives passes to Obama, Clinton and Rice as they knowingly misled the American people in multiple venues, from Sunday morning panel shows to daytime shows such as The View and late night talk shows such as The Late Show with David Letterman. It would appear that the choice of venues is indicative of the utter contempt shown for the victims, their families and every thinking American.

Murder, lies and videotape

It is often said that it is not always the crime, but the cover-up that creates the most serious problems to those involved in criminal activity. So too will it be with Benghazi. The evidence of a massive cover-up exists within reach, waiting for the spotlight of truth to bring it into focus. The video that was identified as being the spark that ignited the protests and ultimately, the attack that resulted in the murder of four Americans plays an important and very telling role, but not in the manner believed by many Americans.

The video holds certain clues in the activities of this administration, as do those associated with it. Based on my own extensive research, investigation and inquiries, it is my professional belief and opinion that it contains the “fingerprints” of certain key individuals acting within and on behalf of this administration, including, perhaps, one who is presently being considered to head a large government agency.

Additionally, it appears that the video can be traced back to individuals and groups who were involved in a case of political intrigue in 2008. A case that when viewed in a certain manner, when focused in a certain way, might also involve the unsolved murder of a young man who was caught in a situation way over his head. Having no choice but to turn government informant, he never got the chance to testify on record, as he was found with a bullet to his head.

As we have seen with such cover-ups as Watergate and the Clinton sex scandal, it is the hubris of those involved in the cover-up that leads to their downfall. However, no one was murdered in either of those two scandals, and the motives of both did not involve taking a country to the brink of a world war.

The truth behind Benghazi, however, is the key to it all.

2 thoughts on “Libya was safer under Gaddafi”

  1. …of course it was ! And so was Egypt under Mubarak. and Tunisia…and
    if you see it from a certain point of view ( the non islamists…), Syria and even Iraq were !.I know people cry for DEMOCRACY, but for those fanatics freedom is SHARIA.., and democracy will be to kill all those who do not accept it. Sad but true

  2. What a mess that place is in. Oh Juliar, remember you promised that you would have the hooligans who smashed the headstones in the Australian WWII cemetery brought to justice. How is that progressing?

Comments are closed.