October 26th, 2012

BenghaziGate: Two 9/11’s Bring Questions

Editor’s note: Oath Keepers is not making any statement by running this article. We are, however, acknowledging that questions exist, and that some credible people are asking those questions. More questions shall undoubtedly arise in coming days and weeks. Our readers are patriots who are not afraid to face hard questions regarding U.S. foreign policy. We will follow developments in this remarkable story as they unfold. We will continue to ask questions on behalf of our Republic of Law. Oath Keepers is not anti-government – Oath Keepers is anti-criminality in government. We know, as Catherine Austin Fitts puts it, that: “If we can’t face it, God can’t fix it.”


Claire Lopez _ Former CIA

Clare Lopez _ Former CIA


BenghaziGate: Two 9/11’s Bring Questions:

Has Uncle Sam Joined The Jihad?

(Early Info Snips October 2012)


One of our favorite American patriots and founding fathers was an anti-Federalist orator named Patrick Henry. On March 23, 1775, in the House of Burgesses, at Saint John’s Church in Richmond, Virginia, Mr. Henry delivered his most famous fiery presentation, a speech which is known as his “Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death” speech. According to historian and biographer William Wirt, Henry closed his speech thusly:

“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me Liberty or give me Death!”

In 1788 he delivered another speech which, though it should be, is not nearly so well-known. An example of his adamant insistence on including a “Bill of Rights” (the first ten Amendments), this lesser-known speech is titled:  Shall Liberty or Empire Be Sought?

In preparation for looking at BenghaziGate and related concepts, let us reflect upon a couple of lines from this speech in which Patrick Henry questioned the body of the Constitution as it stood without the Bill of Rights, which he helped the Convention to finally add –

When the American spirit was in its youth, the language of America was different; liberty, sir, was then the primary object… We drew the spirit of liberty from our British ancestors; by that spirit we have triumphed over every difficulty. But now, sir, the American spirit, assisted by the ropes and chains of consolidation, is about to convert this country into a powerful and mighty empire. If you make the citizens of this country agree to become the subjects of one great consolidated empire of America, your government will not have sufficient energy to keep them together. Such a government is incompatible with the genius of republicanism. …

-end excerpts; read entire speech here: http://www.bartleby.com/268/8/14.html


So Patrick Henry was for keeping power and authority distributed in the several States, was against concentrating power in the new General government, and fought against an overly-empowered Federal government – but he was over-ridden and for more than twenty decades since we have moved toward ever-more centralization of power and authority in the Federal government.

Along the way, we’ve begun to worship the office of President unduly as we’ve watched the Executive usurp Congressional and Judicial powers to the point that, by 1947, President Truman consented to and signed into law the National Security Act of 1947 which created the CIA.  Six short years later our CIA took down the duly elected democratic government of Iran and CIA has lingered long in the middle east ever since, doing what CIA does best — keeping deep dark ugly secrets from the American people while rampaging amok in the name of American and multi-national corporate ‘interests’ at the expense of stability in oil-producing nations.

We see that eventually that omniscient centralized government Patrick Henry dreaded was allowed to develop. For over five decades it has wreaked havoc around the world. Since 1947 it has honed a domestic policy which has intimidated any dissent and has used the strong arm of the government to chill the speech of Americans who do not agree with such mischief. It has burgeoned into an oligarchic, fascistic, iron-fisted super-surveillance military-police state mechanism called the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

And now? Well, now the chickens are coming home to roost. The unholy serpent shall devour its tail while deep dark secrets are transmuted in the sordid bowels of deception and we are found wanting for asking if our dearly beloved Commander in Chief, President Obama, has lied through his teeth regarding the Federal government’s smuggling of armaments to al Qaeda in Libya and Syria.

The question may have standing.

It appears that our ambassador to Libya was working with the CIA. It appears that the CIA was providing arms to al Qaeda and other Islamic Jihadist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood for the purpose of taking down governments in the middle-east – with the President’s knowledge.

If this proves to be true, this thing is positively huge. Can it conceivably cost a sitting President his office? Can it throw the 2012 Presidential election? Can it awaken the cheer-leading sports-addicted and creature-comfort-crazed American public? Dare the media toss it out onto the table?

We are confronted by a bitter question. Watch the following brief videos and judge for yourself whether the U.S. government, all bright and shiny in its choreography and colluded chorus, dressed in its cloak of lies which have been fabricated through six decades of ‘national security secrecy’, has joined al Qaeda or not. Questions are coming “fast and furious”, this time on a truly global and totally world-shattering scale.



Former 20 year CIA veteran, Clare Lopez: “Jordan is targeted! Saudi Arabia is targeted!”

(excerpt from above link – read whole article at link)


  • Could the Obama Administration’s Fast and Furious gunrunning operation to the Mexican drug cartels be simply a dress rehearsal for a much larger gunrunning operation to al Qaida-linked and other Jihadist groups in Libya and, more ominously, Syria?
  • Is the Obama Administration running guns into other Jihadist hot spots?
  • Does the United States of America have troops in Jordan?
  • Was Ambassador Stevens our operational officer in a gunrunning operation to al Qaida linked groups that had “gone wrong?”
  • Did the Obama Administration set Stevens up and leave him (with former Navy Seals, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods and computer expert, Sean Smith) to die?
  • Did President, Secretary Clinton, General Petraeus and others have fore-knowledge?
  • Others?
  • Who else knows now?
  • Does Governor Romney know now?

These and other questions and more were raised yesterday [October 24, 2012] in a conversation between Glen Beck and former CIA agent Clare Lopez.

The videos below are from the above link in this section. [Editing this article on November 03, 2012: If you came to this page via G. Edward Griffin's weekly newsletter, please also include with this article our subsequent posting of Frank Gaffney's article with video, here:

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2012/10/27/gaffney-the-real-reason-behind-benghazigate/ ]








Question: When did Syria become a threat to the USA?

Question: Is “the enemy of my enemy” necessarily my friend, when the enemy of my enemy is al Qaeda?

Question: Should the American people be pleased when the ATF furnishes high-powered guns and ammo to Mexican drug cartels and nobody goes to jail?

Question: Should the American people be pleased when Wachovia Bank launders hundreds of billions of dollars for the Mexican drug cartels and nobody goes to jail?

Question: Should the American people be pleased when taxpayer dollars are spent by the DEA to smuggle drugs into this country from Mexico in order to learn more about the Mexican drug cartels, and nobody goes to jail?

Question: How much outright crime by Eric Holder’s Justice Department, which oversaw the gun running, the money laundering, and the drug smuggling, should the American people put up with, while Eric Holder does not go to jail?

Question: How does the NSA spy on every American citizen’s emails and phone calls when the Fourth Amendment clearly states “probable cause”, and nobody goes to jail?

Question: If the Federal government has been caught lying to the American people about Pearl Harbor, Korea, Vietnam, the Gary Frances Powers U-2 shoot-down over Russia, the Bay of Pigs fiasco, the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the Watergate break-in, the October Surprise, the Iran-Contra scandal, the BCCI scandal, the invasion of Iraq, and the longest ground war in our history – the hunt for al Qaeda in Afghanistan – what on earth would cause any thinking American to blindly believe that the Federal government is not lying through its teeth right now about running arms to al Qaeda in Libya and Syria?

Question: If our Federal government has so concentrated the authority and power which it has usurped from the several States which created it, is it not the responsibility of the several States to rein-in that usurpation and bring it back into compliance with its enumerated powers as listed in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution?

There are, of course, other significant questions. Every American should have lots of questions. A good question might be – If a sitting U.S. President imagines some reason to furnish military armaments to al Qaeda and/or associated Jihadist terror organizations, should that President go to jail?

A truism left to us by Thomas Jefferson will do nicely to end this initial glance at how the power players on high perceive themselves -

“Experience hath Shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.”



Elias Alias, editor

Placing billboards outside of military bases to remind service members of their oath

Please donate and support Oath Keepers mission, every little bit helps!

 Read More Posts

Comments posted belong to the commenter alone, and are not endorsed by Oath Keepers or the administrators for this site. We will remove offensive, racist, or threatening comments.

29 Responses to “BenghaziGate: Two 9/11’s Bring Questions”

Pages: [1] 2 3 » Show All

  1. 1
    Elias Alias Says:

    Additional reading:

    Diana West

    Imagine, pre-9/11/12, that you were responsible for arranging the defense of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Would you have considered American interests and personnel best protected by bringing in a local security outfit called the February 17 Martyrs Brigade?

    The question has yet to come up in House hearings, but I think it holds the key to the Obama administration’s betrayal of the American people in “Benghazi-gate.” To an American with common sense not subverted by advanced degrees, the thought of putting Islamic “martyrs” in charge of American “infidels” in Benghazi – which, fun fact, literally means “city of holy warriors” – would trigger the inevitable “heck, no.” And that’s without even knowing what is significant about Feb. 17.

    But I’m talking about Washington, D.C. Here, placing the lives of Americans in the hands of a thug-army linked to multiple atrocities and drawn from jihad-epicentral eastern Libya disturbs no collective brain wave. No matter that Benghazi and nearby Derna sent more men, per capita, to Iraq to kill Americans than anywhere else in the world. As far as the Obama administration is concerned, putting local boys in barracks inside the consulate compound was a great idea. Why not? President Obama’s ambassador, the late Christopher Stevens, was, as they say, “reaching out” across the jihad spectrum on official business.

    Meanwhile, Ansar al Sharia (“Supporters of Islamic Law”), the al-Qaida-linked militia believed to have led the consulate assault in September, is a spinoff of the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, but that didn’t scratch the lacquered political surface, either. And even as reports remind us of ties among February 17 Martyrs Brigade leadership, the Muslim Brotherhood and the web of jihad-poison spun by Qatar’s Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Libya’s Ali al-Salabi – the latter having been tapped by the Qatari dictatorship to distribute $2 billion to Libyan “rebels” – the focal point remains elsewhere.

    Partly, that’s because the breathtaking lies the Obama administration has told us post-9/11/12 distract our attention from the disastrous policy previously in place. Plus, there remains a lingering confusion over good guys and bad guys. After all, Uncle Sam isn’t supposed to support bad guys. The Obama administration, however, threw in Uncle Sam’s lot with bad guys – the “rebels,” the “martyrs,” the Muslim Brothers, the whole jihad-happy crew in Libya and the wider Middle East. Uncle Sam, more or less, crossed to the “other side.” It is this alliance or support for “martyrs” and their sympathizers in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt and Syria that is the betrayal from which Benghazi-gate rises, particularly as our veterans’ cemeteries and hospitals are filled with casualties caused by such “martyrs.”

    Whether, as the Daily Beast reported, the February 17 Martyrs Brigade may have been ordered by a pro-al-Qaida Libyan politician to “stand down” for the attack remains to be verified. Meanwhile, the State Department reminds us not to forget the service of two brigade members who were beaten and two who were shot defending the compound. “But there were some bad apples in there as well,” one intelligence source told the Daily Beast.

    How could there not be? And here is where the significance of Feb. 17 comes in.

    John Rosenthal, an independent journalist based in Europe, wrote early on that the Libyan rebellion wasn’t led only by al-Qaida commanders. This anti-Gadhafi movement was symbolically also an Islamic jihad on Western liberty itself. We know this because, as Rosenthal reported, the “Day of Rage” called for Feb. 17, 2011, to kick off the Libyan civil war was the fifth anniversary of another assault on the West, also in Benghazi.

    Following Friday prayers on Feb. 17, 2006, thousands of Benghazians attacked the Italian Consulate to punish the temerity of an Italian minister, Roberto Calderoli, who several days earlier had publicly defended free speech in the West. The world was then experiencing another cycle of Islamic violence, this one orchestrated to punish a tiny Danish newspaper for publishing a sheet of Muhammad cartoons and, in turn, Denmark itself for refusing to punish the journalist-transgressors of Islamic law, which outlaws any critiques and all depictions of Muhammad.

    Calderoli didn’t merely defend free speech. During his TV interview, he dramatically unbuttoned his shirt to reveal a T-shirt featuring a cartoon of Muhammad. Referring to Islamic rioters worldwide, he added: “When they recognize our rights, I’ll take off this shirt.” He was forced to resign from his post the next day, a sacrifice on the altar of Shariah (Islamic law) by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. It wasn’t enough.

    “We feared for our lives,” the wife of the Italian consul later told the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera, describing the attack in which the consulate was set on fire. All personnel were safely evacuated. Libyan police used tear gas to try to disperse the rioters, later opening fire and killing 11 attackers.

    These are the “martyrs” who serve as role models for the security team that was defending the U.S. Consulate. Symbolically, they figure into the wider war in Libya, which is often called the February 17 Revolution. With this in mind, it becomes clear that the Islamic war on free speech, the basis of our liberty, was an inspiration of “regime change” in Libya. And we supported it.

    That’s the real scandal.

    The Blaze: Links page w/ good leads and miscellaneous articles directory
    The Blaze
    The Blaze
    The Blaze
    Glenn Beck Connects the Dots in Benghazi Attack: ‘This Is Fast and Furious Times 1,000′
    WorldNet Daily

  2. 2
    Bob Fanning Says:

    Oathkeepers may want to consider helping Gen Ham.

    “President Barack Obama will nominate Army Gen. David Rodriguez to succeed Gen. Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command and Marine Lt. Gen. John Paxton to succeed Gen. Joseph Dunford as assistant commandant of the Marine Corps, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced.”

  3. 3
    Elias Alias Says:

    The Washington Times’ take -


    by Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. on Monday, October 22, 2012

    President Obama’s once seemingly unstoppable march toward re-election hit what he might call “bumps in the road” in Benghazi, Libya, late on Sept. 11, 2012. It might be more accurate to describe the effect of the well-planned and -executed, military-style attack on a diplomatic facility there as the political equivalent of a devastating improvised explosive device on the myth of the unassailability of the Obama record as commander in chief.

    Thanks to intrepid investigative reporting — notably by Bret Baier and Catherine Herridge at Fox News, Aaron Klein at WND.com and Clare Lopez at RadicalIslam.org — and information developed by congressional investigators, the mystery is beginning to unravel with regard to what happened that night and the reason for the subsequent, clumsy official cover-up now known as Benghazigate.

    The evidence suggests that the Obama administration has not simply been engaging, legitimating, enriching and emboldening Islamists who have taken over or are ascendant in much of the Middle East. Starting in March 2011, when American diplomat J. Christopher Stevens was designated the liaison to the “opposition” in Libya, the Obama administration has been arming them, including jihadists like Abdelhakim Belhadj, leader of the al Qaeda franchise known as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.

    Once Moammar Gadhafi was overthrown, Stevens was appointed ambassador to the new Libya run by Mr. Belhadj and his friends. Not surprisingly, one of the most important priorities for someone in that position would be to try to find and secure the immense amount of armaments that had been cached by the dictator around the country and systematically looted during and after the revolution.

    One of the places in Libya most awash with such weapons in the most dangerous of hands is Benghazi. It now appears that Stevens was there — on a particularly risky day, with no security to speak of and despite now copiously documented concerns about his own safety and that of his subordinates — for another priority mission: sending arms recovered from the former regime’s stocks to the “opposition” in Syria. As in Libya, the insurgents are known to include al Qaeda and other Shariah-supremacist groups, including none other than Abdelhakim Belhadj.

    Fox News has chronicled how the Al Entisar, a Libyan-flagged vessel carrying 400 tons of cargo, docked on Sept. 6 in the Turkish port of Iskenderun. It reportedly supplied both humanitarian assistance and arms — including deadly SA-7 man-portable surface-to-air missiles — apparently destined for Islamists, again including al Qaeda elements, in Syria.

    What cries out for further investigation — and debate in the remaining days of this presidential election — is whether this shipment was part of a larger covert Obama effort to transfer weapons to our enemies that could make the Iran-Contra scandal, to say nothing of Operation Fast and Furious, pale by comparison.

    - – Read more: GAFFNEY: The real reason behind Benghazigate – Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/22/the-real-reason-behind-benghazigate/#ixzz2AV6SaGBp
    Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

    Elias Alias

  4. 4
    Elias Alias Says:



    Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later on the annex itself was denied by the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators twice to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

    Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to “stand down.”

    Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

    At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights.

    CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood, though, denied the claims that requests for support were turned down.

    “We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi,” she said. “Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night-and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades.”

    The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.

    Watch “Special Report Investigates: Benghazi — New Revelations” on Fox News at 1 p.m. ET on Saturday, 3 p.m. on Sunday and 10 p.m. on Sunday.

    A Special Operations team, or CIF which stands for Commanders in Extremis Force, operating in Central Europe had been moved to Sigonella, Italy, but they were never told to deploy. In fact, a Pentagon official says there were never any requests to deploy assets from outside the country. A second force that specializes in counterterrorism rescues was on hand at Sigonella, according to senior military and intelligence sources. According to those sources, they could have flown to Benghazi in less than two hours. They were the same distance to Benghazi as those that were sent from Tripoli. Spectre gunships are commonly used by the Special Operations community to provide close air support.

    According to sources on the ground during the attack, the special operator on the roof of the CIA annex had visual contact and a laser pointing at the Libyan mortar team that was targeting the CIA annex. The operators were calling in coordinates of where the Libyan forces were firing from.

    Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters at the Pentagon on Thursday that there was not a clear enough picture of what was occurring on the ground in Benghazi to send help.

    “There’s a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on here,” Panetta said Thursday. “But the basic principle here … is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on.”

    U.S. officials argue that there was a period of several hours when the fighting stopped before the mortars were fired at the annex, leading officials to believe the attack was over.

    Fox News has learned that there were two military surveillance drones redirected to Benghazi shortly after the attack on the consulate began. They were already in the vicinity. The second surveillance craft was sent to relieve the first drone, perhaps due to fuel issues. Both were capable of sending real time visuals back to U.S. officials in Washington, D.C. Any U.S. official or agency with the proper clearance, including the White House Situation Room, State Department, CIA, Pentagon and others, could call up that video in real time on their computers.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/cia-operators-were-denied-request-for-help-during-benghazi-attack-sources-say/#ixzz2AVJr9WIx

  5. 5
    Elias Alias Says:

    Here is Frank Gaffney on youtube -


    Elias Alias

  6. 6
    Cal Says:

    “Oath Keepers is not anti-government — Oath Keepers is anti-criminality in government.”

    The Oath you all took was to “… support and defend the CONSTITUTION of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…”

    When one or a group ignore(s) treasonous activities or other actions against the US CONSTITUTION then that one or group are betraying the solemn and legally binding Oath.

    Karl Miller http://12160.info/group/a-republic-if-you-can-keep-it/forum/topics/know-your-constitution-carl-miller?xg_source=msg_mes_network

    US Constitution, Article VI, paragraph 2 Supremacy Clause

    Supreme Law, ALL Judges will be bound hereby, notwithstanding, to support the US Constitution. and all laws must be in pursuant of the Constitution of the United States of America.

    Treason by sedition – has been committed many times now. (I am not a lawyer, but I can read).
    I guess I can understand why you don’t want to start a lawsuit, I too am afraid. But I will do it, will you help me make out the legal forms? I am just a citizen who refuses to let MY country’s legitimate government be taken over like Germany’s was not so long ago.

  7. 7
    Elias Alias Says:

    Hey Cal,
    It is not that Oath Keepers is “afraid” to start a law suit – it’s just that that is not what Oath Keepers should do in this case. There are organizations out there which should and could file legal action against this, but Oath Keepers is not equipped or capable of doing that. Please also know that there is a lot more involved than filling out legal forms.
    Finally, Oath Keepers is not “ignoring” the treason – we’re speaking out about it. But we are opposing that in a manner which our stated mission as a corporate entity requires – as an educational organization. That is what we do – we educate. We are a psychological operations organization with a primary goal of outreaching to our firefighters, peace officers, and soldiers in hopes of educating each one of them about the meaning in the Oath they swore to the document which created a government. There are a number of professional organizations with the manpower and assests and structure to file the necessary legal actions. We are not that, but we are certain as you are that lawsuits need to be forthcoming immediately. We are helping bring that knowledge to light.
    Thanks for your input here and your support. You are appreciated muchly, especially by me, as I’m the guy who posts your comments, each of which I must read before posting.

    Elias Alias

  8. 8
    Spitfire Says:

    Two lawsuits have already been filed for Government Treason naming the infamous Eric Holder and a host of other high ranking Government officials for fraud, insider trading, RICO statute violations, and of course HIGH TREASON. One was filed in November 2011 and one was filed as a type of class action this past week. The CNBC Online Media Content Control Manager, who allowed that lawsuit story to be posted LIVE online on CNBC had his two children MURDERED less than 24 hours later. His name is Kevin Krim. Within minutes of being notified of his childrens murder, the story was removed. You can only fing it in a cached page now. The original story is GONE with only a commentary beneath the place where it used to be, on unrelated content, as is to say, it was never there. So when you are talking about filing Lawsuits against TPTB, you better have an army to back you up. Which is why I feel that this matter is a PERFECT EXAMPLE of what Oath Keepers could and should help expose.




  9. 9
    Freedom76 Says:

    Romney Rep. Peter King: Presidential Kill List “Totally Constitutional”


  10. 10
    Nancy Says:

    Judge Jeanine asks White House: ‘How do you sleep at night?’


Pages: [1] 2 3 » Show All

Leave a Reply

© 2012 www.oathkeepers.org | Oath Keepers Corp Address: 5130 S. Fort Apache Rd - Las Vegas, NV 89148