• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

It seemed far fetched back then,...

Steve

Well-known member
It seemed far fetched back then,... but does it now?

But today, C. O. Jones at the Western Journalism Center reported another October Surprise that Obama may—may—have planned:

I received a phone call from an old friend that has been in Washington D.C. for years and is fairly well-connected politically. What she told me was ugly and sinister, yet very compelling. She said she had received information from someone high up in White House circles, and wanted my thoughts….According to her, Barack Obama, wanting an “October Surprise,” had secretly arranged with the Muslim Brotherhood for a kidnapping of our ambassador.

This would have been the greatest false-flag job. Arab terrorists kidnap Ambassador Stevens on the eleventh anniversary of September 11. Then in October (hence October Surprise), a special-ops team lays on a daring rescue, something right out of any of several movies (Navy S.E.A.L.S., The Delta Force, etc.) Hooray for Obama! And why would the Muslim Brotherhood cooperate with such a scheme? Because they would want Obama re-elected even worse than Obama wants another term.

Only, according to the source, everyone slipped up. The Muslim Brotherhood, according to this narrative, gave the job to Al Qaeda in Libya. And those guys didn’t want to hold the Ambassador for any ransom. They wanted him dead. They wanted revenge for Osama bin Laden. And they got it.

Panic in the White House. Quick, find something to blame it on! Hence the video story, and UN Ambassador Susan Rice lying through her pearly white teeth all over the talk-show circuit five days later. And maybe Vice-President Biden’s incredible answer in the Vice-Presidential debate was part of it.


is it plausible?
 

Mike

Well-known member
I don't know. The CIA would have been involved and that's unlikely for them.

I don't believe running guns are involved either. There's enough of that going out in the open................
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
I think a more likely scenario was an administration that was so totally focused on re-election, that everything, and everyone else got to suck hind tit. Once TSHTF, then it was damage control which included bald-faced lying to the Amerikan people.

But, afterall, the lies don't matter. Changing the country forever is what really mattered. It was all for the greater good.
 

Tam

Well-known member
It is people like the Benghazi Whistle Blowers that just testified to the Congress that makes me truly believe there was no US involvement in the original 911 attacks. As if there had been, somebody somewhere would have got a lawyer and made it known they had evidence to prove the Bush Administration were trying to pull a cover up, just like these heros did to the Obama Administration. And the way the Dems were out for Bush and Cheney's blood they would have had their Left Bias Media thugs clamouring to be the first to release the scandalous headlines unlike the media is willing to do about Obama's involvement in Benghazi.
 
Top