Many people have wondered why American forces were being sent to the border of Turkey. It seems quite interesting since during the questioning of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the issue of Turkey and gun running came up.
The interaction between Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) and Clinton went like this (pick up at the 2:19 mark):
Paul asked Clinton about whether there was a gun running operation in Benghazi. She claimed that she did not know of a special mission in which the U.S. was involved in such an operation.
“Is the U. S. involved with any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons, buying, selling, anyhow transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?” Paul questioned.
“To Turkey?” Clinton asked. “I will have to take that question for the record. Nobody has ever raised that with me.”
“It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that may have weapons,” Paul continued, “and what I’d like to know is the annex that was close by, were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons, and were any of these weapons being transferred to other countries, any countries, Turkey included?”
“Well, senator, you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex,” Clinton responded. “I will see what information is available.”
“You’re saying you don’t know?” asked Paul.
“I do not know,” Clinton affirmed. “I don’t have any information on that.”
Now this little tidbit was not given a lot of time in the media. I confess I am even quite limited in writing on the subject.
However, Aaron Klein did confirm with knowledgeable security sources that “the use of the Benghazi mission in aiding the rebels who are known to be saturated by al-Qaida and other Islamic terrorist groups.”
In September, KleinOnline broke the story that the slain U.S. ambassador, Christopher Stevens, played a central role in recruiting jihadists to fight Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, according to Egyptian security officials.
In November, Middle Eastern security sources further described both the U.S. mission and nearby CIA annex in Benghazi as the main intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels that was being coordinated with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Among the tasks performed inside the building was collaborating with countries, most notably Turkey, on the recruitment of fighters – including jihadists – to target Assad’s regime, the security officials said.
The White House has said that they were against supplying arms to Syrian rebels who are largely made up of terrorists. It seems they are in direct contradiction with the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and former CIA Director David Petraeus.
During the Senate hearings on Benghazi, there was an exchanged between Senator John McCain (R-AZ), outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and General Martin Dempsey.
McCain asked both men if they supported a plan to “provide weapons to the resistance in Syria.”
“We do,” Panetta replied.
“You did support that?” McCain asked again.
“We did,” added Dempsey, who was sitting next to Panetta.
The U.S. has admitted direct involvement with arming Libyan rebel groups last year against Moammar Gaddafi and his regime. In fact, Chris Stevens was to serve as a U.S. liaison to those rebels. He reportedly worked directly with Abdelhakim Belhadj of the al-Qaida-tied Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.
In an interview with Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, he acknowledged that a significant number of the Libyan rebels were not only al-Qaeda fighters, but they had also fought against U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. He then stated that his fighters “are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists,” but then added “members of al-Qaida are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader.”
One of the things, I’ve struggled with in writing on the Benghazi matter was the use of the terms embassy and consulate. I have often used the term consulate, though the first reports indicated an embassy or consulate. Interestingly enough, the State Department lists only one embassy in Libya and that is in Tripoli. There are no consulates listed.
In addition, Klein points out in his article that “U.S. media reports on the events in Benghazi have been misleading. The vast majority of media coverage worldwide refers to the U.S. facility that was attacked as a ‘consulate,’ even though the government itself has been careful to call it a ‘mission.'” However, in the following video where Barack Obama announces the attacks on September 12, 2012 from the Rose Garden he calls is a “diplomatic post (0.27 mark).” He is obviously not using the term to speak of an office or job, such as might be used to describe Ambassador Chris Stevens, since he then goes on to name those killed in the attack on the “diplomatic post.” Calls to the State Department to define the term “diplomatic post” resulted in numerous transfers with no one being able to define it, but I was assured that the would respond and define the term. We’ll see how that pans out.
Klein points out that government officials have tried to be careful in referring to Benghazi as a “U.S. Special Mission” which was set up without the Libyan government’s knowledge. He also said, “Another key driver behind the weak security platform in Benghazi was the decision to treat Benghazi as a temporary, residential facility, not officially notified to the host government, even though it was also a full-time office facility. This resulted in the Special Mission compound being excepted from office facility standards and accountability under the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (SECCA) and the Overseas Security Policy Board (OSPB).”
From all points, this was not an official mission of the United States, but was rather something else. Additionally, Paula Broadwell’s speech regarding a CIA prison comes into play here and the entire scenario lends credibility to the theory Glenn Beck put forth several months ago about the fact that Ambassador Stevens was the main gun runner and that this was a CIA operation which blew up in their faces.
Consequently all the lies that are on display for all to hear are miserable attempts to cover up the truth of what our government was engaged in and that is supplying the very people that they would indefinitely detain us for, via the NDAA if we had dealings with them, with weapons of war to overthrow another country’s government.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook and Twitter, and follow our friends at RepublicanLegion.com.
Become an insider!
Sign up for the free Freedom Outpost email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.