Who Really Killed Ambassador Stevens and What It Has to Do With the U.N. Takeover of the U.S.
The Benghazi scandal will eventually find the light of day.
It is the story that will not die because some very powerful people are
determined that the truth be brought out in order to promote regime
change related to the Obama administration.
Cries for Help Ignored
Three times Ambassador Chris Stevens begged
for more military protection and three times, then Secretary of State,
Hillary Clinton, denied Stevens cries for help. Clinton did not respond
to requests for help by saying no, she responded by not responding to
the pleas through official channels.
Stevens had long been a CIA asset who had
run guns to al-Qaeda
for the purposes of gaining assistance for the CIA inspired led regime
changes in Libya and then in Syria. This is nothing new and has been
widely reported.
It is not a secret that the CIA’s propensity to use rogue forces to accomplish
a foreign policy objective (i.e., regime change) is not new. The fact
that the CIA engages in drug trafficking to fund such an operation is
also not new as the American public was introduced to the existence of
Air America, Iran-Contra and the nefarious actions of Lt. Colonel Oliver
North in televised congressional hearings during the Reagan
administration.
What was not known at the time of
Iran-Contra, was that the CIA was convicted, through its paramilitary
assets and civilian contractor liaisons (e.g.
Blackwater, DynCorp, Wachovia Wells Fargo and Halliburton), not only with drug trafficking but
sex trafficking to raise
the money
to arm al-Qaeda in the attack upon Libya and then Syria. Part Three
will stunningly reveal that every major bank is involved all the way up
to the Federal Reserve. This article deals solely with why the military
leadership would like to promote regime change.
Iran Contra, Same Song, Different Verse
On May 1, 2014, Tosh Plumlee told Alex Jones and his audience that he has firsthand knowledge of
US gun running and ancillary drug running to support Black Ops operations in the Middle East. This is the same exact
pattern which was utilized to fuel the Iran-Contra
Affair in
which the Russian backed Sandinistas would be opposed by the Contra
using funds derived from CIA basked drug operations which led to the
rise of drug-related street gangs in South Central LA in which cocaine
became the main commodity. The implication is that the same thing was
going on at the time of Ambassador Stevens death in that
Stevens was running guns to al-Qaeda.
However, there was one more key element of CIA funding which would be
used to fund the of proxy forces for the purpose or regime change and
that would be child sex trafficking.
Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney Was the First Notable to Expose These Crimes of the Century
Former Representative Cynthia McKinney was
told in 2006 by then Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, that it was not
President Bush’s policy of the Bush administration to award companies,
with a track record of human trafficking with
government contracts.
Yet, the practice continues, government contracts are still awarded
even as innocent children are sex trafficked and are sold into a life of
slavery at the behest of Halliburton, DynCorp, Wachovia Wells Fargo and
other multinational
corporations with close ties to the political and corporate elite.
In 2006, McKinney grilled the Secretary of
Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, with the following question: “Well how do you
explain the fact that DynCorp and its successor companies have received
and continue to receive government contracts?” This question was posed
to Rumsfeld AFTER McKinney had pointed out that several multinational corporations, with close ties to the elite, had already been busted for
selling innocent children into a life of child sex slavery. The heated exchange takes place
here.
Drug running and child sex trafficking are big business. As the reader will discover, later in this article, the money
is skimmed, laundered and used to promote regime change through the use
of proxy forces such as al-Qaeda. If one can be made to understand this
process, then one can understand the power of the shadow government and
how it effectively operates as the supreme fourth branch of government.
US Military Leadership Is In Survival Mode
As Ambassador Chris Stevens was begging for
help after the attack had begun, AFRICOM commander, General Hamm, had
activated a special forces team within minutes of learning that the
embassy, which was really a
CIA safe house,
which was in charge of facilitating an arms transfer between the CIA
and its proxy representatives (e.g. Chris Stevens) was under attack.
The military does not give a damn about drug
running and child sex trafficking. However, they do care about their
careers and the preservation of the military as an independent and
viable entity.
The firing of 260+ senior command officers by Obama, serves to threaten this viability. The presence of UN vehicles and troops also threaten the viability of the US military.
From the perspective of the military, the
Obama administration is the mortal enemy of the viability and
independence of the American military.
If one cares to do the research,
I was reporting on these facts that Obama had survived a coup attempt at this time. A
few months later, people like Glenn Beck decided they would publish
similar information after criticizing me a few months earlier for
printing
what they would eventually publish. These same insider sources are
telling me that child sex trafficking was helping to support the arming
of the rebels in Libya and Syria. Yes, I am saying that General Hamm was
part of plot which would have brought down Obama and Clinton in one
fell swoop. This was an attempted military coup just as I had previously
reported.
When General Ham received his “stand down” orders from Obama, he made plans to commit mutiny and
go ahead with the rescue of Stevens. And as he did, he was arrested within minutes of contravening
the order
by his second in command, General Rodriquez. Admiral Gayouette, the
commander of Carrier Strike Group Three, was preparing to provide
intelligence and air cover for General Hamm’s rescue team in violation
of his standing orders and he was promptly relieved of command
for allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment.”
The positions held by Hamm and Gayouette are so powerful and so sensitive, their replacements required approval from the Senate.
Also, at that time, the Middle East was considered to be a war zone in
which it was believed that the US was trying to provoke Syria and/or
Iran into attacking the US so we could have the pretext for invasion.
Therefore, this should be considered to be an event of epic proportions.
There are key questions about the mutiny on Benghazi which need to be answered:
1. Did Hamm and Gayouette commit mutiny in a war zone?
Answer: Without question!
2. Where did Hamm and Gayouette fit into the power structure of the military?
Answer: In a war zone, these two men
represented two of the top four commanders in the region. Hamm would
have overseen any military incursion into Syria or Iran. When Obama fired the two leaders, he effectively gutted his military command structure in the region.
3. Did Hamm and Gayouette’s conspiracy to commit mutiny in the face standing presidential orders occur in isolation?
Answer: Only a person with absolutely no
knowledge of military command structure would be so naive to believe
this assertion. The military builds in redundant chains of command which
overlap. There is no way that Hamm and Gayouette’s mutiny was occurring
without the knowledge of their superiors as well as the NSA, which
explains how the Obama administration learned of this betrayal and moved
to arrest both men before any rescue effort could have been launched.
4. Why were key leaders in the military willing to risk their careers in this mutiny?
Answer: Because every senior command military
officer was being faced with the continual acquisition and control of
our military by outside forces and this threatened the upward mobility
of the more aggressive commanders and it threatened the very viability
of the military itself.
Hillary Clinton
When Hillary “What does it matter?” Clinton
was unable to contain the fall out, and subsequent cover up from
Ambassador Stevens death, she was out as Secretary of State and John
“Ketchup” Kerry was in. The appointment of Kerry was a brilliant move by
an otherwise bumbling set of attempts to cover up the murder of
Stevens.
During the Reagan administration, Kerry led a
congressional investigation which ultimately led to the conviction and
exposure of Air America and the nefarious Iran-Contra Affair which was
led by the CIA in violation against the laws of this nation. Kerry’s
appointment to the Secretary of State position would ease the fears of a
cover up because he had previously blown the lid off of a similar
Benghazi operation over 25 years ago. On the surface, Kerry was the
perfect choice if the administration wanted to avoid allegations of any
further allegations of a Benghazi cover up. Unfortunately, for the Obama
administration, the seemingly brilliant appointment of Kerry did not
throw the investigative dogs off of the Benghazi trail and it is this
scandal, along with the
IRS scandal,
that will just not go away. This undying attention on this story
happened thanks to tips provided to journalists such as myself by
disenfranchised and former US military.
If there is ever a revolution in this country
involving elements of the US military vs. the blue helmeted foreign
(i.e. Russian, Chinese, et al.) assets, these disenfranchised elements
of the military, will need the popular support of the people to win.
Hence, the elite behind Obama need to be exposed.
Conclusion
There are two more important questions to ask:
1. Why did Stevens have to die?
Answer: The administration discovered that
the military was providing back-channel information to journalists in
order to expose that this administration was doing business with
al-Qaeda for the purposes of regime change. Steven was killed less than
two months before the election of Obama to a second term. Can one only
imagine what the public backlash would have been if Stevens had been
rescued, stayed angry and told all in retaliation?
2. Ultimately, why would the military want to save a CIA drug runner and sex trafficker?
Answer: Stevens could have been leveraged to
bring down the present administration which poses such a dire threat to
the careers of the military’s leadership. FOR THE MILITARY, THE
LAST STRAW CONSISTS OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION RELEASING MILLIONS OF
ILLEGAL ALIENS AS PRETEXT TO THE UN GAINING POLICE POWERS WITHIN THE US
UNDER THE GUISE OF PROVIDING HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE.
In Part Three, I will expose the irrefutable
and publicly available proof that Stevens was sex-trafficking for the
CIA in order to promote regime change.
The sources supporting the allegations of
drug-running and child sex trafficking in order to raise and launder the
money associated with promoting regime change continue to be former
representative, Cynthia McKinney, a quiet but damning Senate
Subcommittee Report, a senior banking official from one of the major
banks and your common sense.
If you want one more reason as to why there are so many
dead banksters, you may get your wish in Part Three.
Posts
Dane
Wigington’s compelling presentation explains how the past decades of
covert, military weather warfare programs has turned earth’s atmosphere
into a catastrophic soup of chemicals to create the climate change we
should fear most.
Geoengineering
investigator, Cliff Carnicom is researching disturbing biological
contaminants likely sprayed into the atmosphere by aircraft. This
finding has been the basis of his ongoing research into a cure for
Mergellons syndrome since 2005. (More)
When
key civilian agencies and pilots are asked to participate in a “secret”
test program of spraying aerosols as solar radiation management (SRM)
they would likely sign on to a program that paid them good money and
bonuses for their secret service. If these same personnel were further
informed that the aerosols were climate engineering weapons intended to
destroy property and victimize American citizens – including their own families
– most of them might be far more reluctant to participate. The
remaining personnel who agree to stay on would be no different than the
American pilots who sprayed Agent Orange over populations of innocent
civilians in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and Thailand – even after they knew
the aerosols poisoned food crops, caused birth defects and would likely
degrade their own health.
