Is the real reason that President Mordred Obama wants to bomb Syria is that Intel shows the 400 shoulder launched surface to air missiles lost in the Benghazi fiasco has shown up in the hands of some Syrians? http://www.helpingmisguideddemocrats.com/benghazi.html http://nypost.com/2011/11/12/israel-plane-scared/ Did Assad use the wealth of the Syrian state to buy at least some of those missiles from the black weapons market? Is the pressure being placed on Mordred by the American Jewish wing of the Democratic Party to do something NOW about the threat of these lost missiles to Israel? Is this the reason for the sudden and intense drive to bomb Syria? If the Benghazi Looted Missiles are not in Syria, where are they? -
Here's a bit more info on the lost missiles: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ery-ugly-people-says-whistleblowers-attorney/ We've seen Syria become a haven for stolen or stashed weapons in the past, particularly in the beginning of the Iraq invasion. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/07/14/And-where-did-syrias-chemical-weapons
The Middle East and North Africa have been flooded with Libyan stockpiles, including MANPADs. Yes those weapons are in Gaza. The fallout of Benghazi, once realized, will reveal exactly how much more dangerous the world is for Obama's toppling of Gaddhafi. Libyan weapons are DEFINITELY in Syria. Both the US and AQ provided them. Everything is documented here. http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=302657 They can knock birds out of the sky at will. Get ready to absorb that cost btw... countermeasures for every international aircraft. Here is a daily mail thing. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...azi-attack-says-whistle-blowers-attorney.html There is a lot of good info there, even though it is daily mail. The reason they are afraid of the 400 stingers is because they tie into the colossal (*)(*)(*)(*)up of knowingly and illegally arming AQ to fight Libyan forces, while we pelt them from the air, and surgically remove leadership via drone. The 400 matter to them because they are part of the underlying Benghazi mission. A buyback program... and arms distribution. We authorized Qatar to ship Libyans US stingers and assorted other candies (US and NATO weapons), then buy back those weapons, and the Libyan stockpiles, which we were surreptitiously shipping to Turkey to get to Syria, and probably stockpiling in that annex. We figured out that Gaddhafi wasn't completely straight with us... and we start finding hidden caches of chemical weapons... namely Sarin and Mustard Gas late 2011. So... chances are... someone stumbled across some other stockpiles, and that is why the CIA went all Rambo on the AQ pigs we were working with... doing renditions at the annex as exposed by Paula Broadwell, which is why Petraeus was forced to retire for disclosing national secrets. So we were kidnapping and in some sort of enhanced way, probably trying very hard to pull the location of these chemical weapons from these guys... then on September 8th AQ, who we hired to secure the mission, warned the state dept that they would no longer protect the ambassador. Then Stevens flew in for the 11th. The rest will be history... or not. If a tree falls sort of thing.
If AQ brings down airliners because of Obama's idiocy, it's safe to say that Obama will blame everyone but himself. He's a total dirtbag.
My sources are above respite. Should you take issue with something, address it. There are nothing BUT questions about Benghazi. I am seeking answers. What are you doing?
One thing is for certain, if they ever find WMD's in Syria and learn that they came from Iraq, we'll never hear about it. The left's "two unpaid for wars - cherry picked and fabricated the intelligence" argument would collapse like a house of cards, and they can't allow that to happen.
Did you notice that Kerry now proclaims that there were at least 12 chemical attacks? Why on Earth would we only know about one or two? There is also this questionable MintPress release. They are new... started by an American of Palestinian parents... however they have hired all MANNER of differently aligned journalists. I do not find them credible, so meet with some skepticism... however... it warrants reading. http://www.mintpressnews.com/witnes...supplied-rebels-with-chemical-weapons/168135/
Firstly... I don't think Iraq's Sarin would be viable at this point without heaps and heaps of it. It degrades over a decade to very limited effect. Also... that would pretty much mean it came from Assad. The government at the time would have been the recipient of the chems. It is entirely possible that Assad's younger brother (who handles most of the military (*)(*)(*)(*)) has gone rogue... perhaps hoping to replace his brother... but my guess is... these were Libyan chems still old, but not as old as Sadams, or homemade (*)(*)(*)(*) in Iraq, where we have closed 3 AQ Sarin manufacturing labs... which also explain their "not ready for prime time" signature. It is a mess... and nobody knows anything except those without credibility. Applying the brakes, however, ain't Obama's thing.
Above respite? Want to try that again? If you meant to say "above reproach", you must be joking. If one is so predisposed, one can dream up questions about anything. The problem that you have is that you are only interested in asking the questions. The answers are not to your liking.....so you just think of some more questions to ask. I will answer your dopey question. No. Obama is not pushing to bomb Syria to cover up Benghazi. The answer is no.
Autocorrect strikes again. Yes... I incorrectly tapped... and did not catch it. Feel free to reproach one of my sources. I did not pose the question. No... Obama is not bombing Syria to cover Benghazi. Even he is not stupid enough to bomb a country for 400 weapons we didn't intend to fall into the wrong hands. It is a MUCH bigger platform, concerning Iran/Israel and the former and current secular Ba'athist countries. So Libya and the result is very much intertwined because of the proliferation of weapons by AQ from Libya.
