What Really Happened in Benghazi and Why

by Scott Creighton

I call it the “Innocence of the Muslims Psyop” for a very good reason: because the pretext of the attack, the 14 minute “movie” that was released just prior to the attack, gives us defining proof of the simple fact that the entire thing was staged and then used to fulfill an agenda.

While everyone is talking new revelations about the attack, who was told to lie, who ordered the stand down of U.S. troops, who directed the current cover-up… all these things that are of vital importance… no one is remembering how all of this started, how it was clearly stage-managed from beginning to end.

Why did this psyop take place? What was the purpose behind it? What was the grand plan behind the Innocence of the Muslims Psyop?

Those questions are surprisingly simple as that they have already been answered by both Hillary Clinton and David Cameron. Our policies and their actions have made it all quite clear. The “why” is the renewed resource war in Africa and our ongoing colonization campaign in Africa.

The “how” of it all is not that hard to see if you fail to forget the details of the story.

click on image for larger view

The Innocence of the Muslims Psyop: What Happened and Why

  1. The Often Forgotten Question of “Why?”
  2. The “Innocence of bin Laden the Muslims” Film and the FBI’s Confidential Informant Nakoula Basseley Nakoula a.k.a. “Sam Bacile”
  3. Preparations for the Attack – Our Destabilization Contractors, Ansar al-Shariah, at the Helm from the Beginning, Middle and End
  4. Stand Down Orders Came from AFRICOM Who Also Just Happened to Benefit from the Psyop
  5. Conclusion: It’s Isn’t All That Hard to See

1. The Often Forgotten Question of “Why?”

Our dismantling of Libya served the “Greater Good” interests of savage capitalism. As Justin Raimondo of AntiWar would say, we brought our precious neoliberal liberalized “free-market economy” to another nation who had foolishly tried to cheat their oligarchs out of their rightful place on the Forbes 500 list. Our “progressive” leaders, under the time-tested guise of “humanitarian intervention” were able to fulfill one more step in the “7 Countries in 5 Years” plan.

But that in itself wasn’t enough. They had a much bigger prize in mind. All of Africa.

You see, the administration needed a justification to put boots on the ground and drones in the skies of Africa. All of Africa. Libya was over though. Gadhafi was already murdered. The most prosperous and free nation in Africa was already being chopped up by the vulture capitalists and board-room sharks, so they needed some other excuse to mount a new military campaign which could be used anywhere at anytime on the continent.

People skip over this fact as if the United States can send thousands of troops and drones anywhere they want but that is simply not the case. They can and do send CIA black ops into various countries to do little actions here and there, but we can’t just invade Canada for instance with a large scale force (we bought Canada’s government). Even the flawed 2001 AUMF act has limits. They needed a terrorist act, a big one, to garner the political clout to justify sending all that fire-power to Africa and turn them loose on all those meddlesome countries who have forgotten that we are the greatest nation on earth.

“After KONY2012 failed due to their closeted pitchman smoking bath salts and running naked in San Diego for all too see his little bits on the side of the road, the powers that be in the U.S. created the nearly as disastrous Innocence of the Muslims Psyop to serve the exact same ends: create a pretext for President Obama to put away his phony Peace Prize and launch a continent-wide aggressive, illegal, immoral military campaign on countless little countries (35 to be exact) in order to recolonize them and make them bend to the will of the IMF/World Bank and the various other masters of the universe.” Scott Creighton, Jan. 2013

They needed a justification for the first black president of the United States to recolonize Africa. They desperately needed a psychological operation to serve as the pretext to that end.

2. The “Innocence of bin Laden the Muslims” Film and the FBI’s Confidential Informant Nakoula Basseley Nakoula a.k.a. “Sam Bacile”

But the Innocence of the Muslims psyop was deeply flawed from the beginning. Hillary Clinton was busy telling us “conspiracy theorists” that the administration had nothing to do with the making of this film while the whole time, it turns out, they were also re-writing the talking points and re-editing the CIA documents.

For a while there, all the attention it garnered backfired on the administration and while they were busy trying to tell us time and time again that the attack on the CIA building was a spontaneous development (more on that later) researchers and writers were figuring out where the ridiculous 14 minute film actually came from.

Turns out the 14 minutes of Hate movie came from the FBI. They had a confidential informant named Nakoula Basseley Nakoula who was trying to clear himself of various federal charges who they paid to make a movie called “The Innocence of Bin Laden” and then they had him set up a screening for it in L.A. as a honey-pot trap for local “radicalized Muslims”

In remarks stressing that the U.S. government had “absolutely nothing to do with” the anti-Islam film that has touched off violence in the Middle East, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton yesterday sought to quash Arab concerns that the “disgusting and reprehensible” movie was somehow produced or condoned by American officials.

However, Clinton’s attempt to distance the U.S. from “Innocence of Muslims”–and, by extension, its felonious producer–may be complicated by the revelation that Nakoula Basseley Nakoula became a government informant after his 2009 arrest for bank fraud, The Smoking Gun has learned.” The Smoking Gun, Sept. 14th 2012

The trap didn’t work and the flunkie informant sat across the street at a diner probably trying to figure out how many years in prison he was going to serve.

The original title was “The Innocence of Bin Laden,” which the filmmaker expected would attract an audience of radical Islamists who would become disillusioned about their faith after watching, Klein said.

Sam had a crew of people passing out fliers around the dangerous mosques in California, trying to get these folks who love Osama Bin Laden who would come to cheer Osama Bin Laden,” Klein said. “But the movie was going to expose all the stuff that Muhammad really did, like murder and pedophilia and stuff like that.”

The movie had one theatrical showing at a cinema on Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood, Klein said.

I got there about a half hour before the movie started and stayed a half hour after it started and I saw zero — nada, none, no people — go inside,” Klein said.

The lack of interest in the movie left the filmmaker depressed and embarrassed, Klein said. He said he didn’t know how much the budget was or who gave money for production. He said he didn’t invest. “  San Fransisco Chronical

A couple months later, the film re-surfaced, this time as “The Innocence of the Muslims”. It had been hacked as scribbled together in order to serve a different purpose and the FBI informant was given a new cover story and identity as well, “Sam Bacile”.

But it didn’t take long for the press, official and unofficial, to flush it all out and when we did, it suddenly became very embarrassing for the administration. They had to suddenly lock Nakoula Basseley Nakoula away in a federal institution so reporters couldn’t ask him any more questions about why he pretended to be Jewish in a couple interviews after the film went public. The LAST thing they wanted was for people to start to figure out how that film was in some FBI’s filing cabinet prior to the Benghazi psyop.

After all, how the hell could they explain how a little honey-pot film made for the FBI by one of their own assets ended up being used to justify what they were determined to call a spontaneous riot in Benghazi?

The first thing they did was tell the press they couldn’t ask any questions:

All aspects of the attack, including what led up to it, its causes, the identity of the perpetrators, and the circumstances surrounding the death of Amb. Chris Stevens and the other three Americans,are off limits for reporters.” Foreign Policy Magazine

You can see why they didn’t want anyone asking questions about this aspect of the operation. You will also notice that even in the alternative press at current, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula and the “Innocence of bin Laden the Muslims” video is strangely missing from most discussions.

3. Preparations for the Attack – Our Destabilization Contractors, Ansar al-Shariah, at the Helm from the Beginning, Middle and End

As I have been reporting since the beginning of this story, it has been widely understood if not certainly under-reported, that some people inside the Libyan government we installed were telling us the truth about the attacks from the start. Nobody wanted to pay attention.

“The way these perpetrators acted and moved — I think we, and they’re choosing the specific date for this so-called demonstration, I think we have no, this leaves us with no doubt that this was pre-planned, determined,”

It was planned, definitely, it was planned by foreigners, by people who entered the country a few months ago, and they were planning this criminal act since their arrival,” Libyan President Mohamed Yousef El-Magariaf

It was a well planned and carried out attack, “staged” if you will, though the official position from the White House continued to claim it was a surprise long after the truth had come out.

“Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous – not a premeditated – response to what had transpired in Cairo,” U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice

That remained their story for about two weeks after the attack. But it was a lie. The entire scandal taking place now is about how much they knew and how desperately they tried to cover it up.

“Political considerations influenced the talking points that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice used five days after the deadly Sept. 11 assault in Benghazi, Libya, with State Department and other senior administration officials asking that references to terror groups and prior warnings be deleted, according to department emails.” Huffington Post May 11th 2013

But that narrative couldn’t be further from the truth and there is a very good reason the Obama administration didn’t want that particular terror group mentioned along with the story… they were in the employ of the U.S. government just like Nakoula Basseley Nakoula was.

It began around nightfall on Sept. 11 with around 150 bearded gunmen, some wearing the Afghan-style tunics favored by Islamic militants, sealing off the streets leading to the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. They set up roadblocks with pick-up trucks mounted with heavy machine guns, according to witnesses.

The trucks bore the logo of Ansar al-Shariah, a powerful local group of Islamist militants who worked with the municipal government to manage security in Benghazi, the main city in eastern Libya and birthplace of the uprising last year that ousted Moammar Gadhafi after a 42-year dictatorship.

There was no sign of a spontaneous protest against an American-made movie denigrating Islam’s Prophet Muhammad. But a lawyer passing by the scene said he saw the militants gathering around 20 youths from nearby to chant against the film. Within an hour or so, the assault began, guns blazing as the militants blasted into the compound.” Washington Post

According to the forgotten Washington Post article, Ansar al-Shariah was working with the municipal government in Benghazi, a government we installed mind you, and had been working to help overthrow the legitimate Libyan government from the very beginning of our destabilization campaign.

The administration had actually hired a group, February 17th Martyrs Brigade, to provide security for that compound. It is well understood that they abandoned their posts prior to the attack by their friends Ansar al-Sharia and even left the gate to the compound unlocked so they could get in easier.

Several entries on the militia’s Facebook page openly profess sympathy for Ansar al-Sharia, the hardline Islamist extremist group widely blamed  for the deadly attack on the mission. The U.S. State Department did not respond to a Newsmax request for an explanation as to why the February 17th Martyrs Brigade was hired to protect the mission. NewsMax

In short, they were our contractors in the destabilization campaign and they were run by two of the men who ended up dying during the Benghazi psyop, Amb. Stevens who went to Libya prior to the so-called “revolution” and Sean Smith, a propaganda specialist who helped create many of the fake news stories coming out of Libya while we were using these terrorists to force regime change.

It has even come out in this latest round of testimony that our destabilization contractors took Stevens to a hospital they controlled.

According to testimony given by whistleblower and deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya Gregory Hicks, the hospital where Ambassador Chris Stevens was taken after the Benghazi attack was being operated by Ansar al-Sharia, an Islamic militia group. The terrorists who attacked the U.S. consulate on September 11, 2012 were from Ansar al-Sharia. Town Hall

The press has tried desperately to spin this in such a way as to claim they did that in order to bait our Special Forces into coming to get him as a trap of some kind, but they didn’t do that and in fact, the doctor at the hospital Ansar al-Shariah controlled became a critical part of the narrative of Amb. Stevens’ death in the weeks that followed. No one at that time mention he worked at a hospital “controlled” by the al-Qaeda linked Ansar al-Shariah.

So Ansar al-Shariah was there from the very beginning. They were the attackers of the consulate that night and they whisked their friends and former co-workers, Smith and Stevens, to a hospital THEY were in control of.

Therefore when I say Ansar al-Shariah was in control of the operation from start to finish, what am I saying? I’m saying WE were in control of the operation from start to finish and THAT is why they were desperate to scrub any mention of our contractors out of the official memos.

Don’t you find it odd that those two officials are the ones who ended up dying that night?

4. Stand Down Orders Came from AFRICOM Who Also Just Happened to Benefit from the Psyop

Not only were the press ordered to stand down in the wake of the Benghazi psyop by Hillary Clinton (just as they are being ordered to effectively stand down now) but during the assault on the compound, apparently our nearby Special Forces were ordered to stand down as well…

… and you will never guess where that order came from…

The new Benghazi whistle-blower, Mr. Hicks, testified to congress recently that it was his impression that the order to stand down, to keep U.S. Special Forces out of the fight in Benghazi, came straight from AFRICOM or SOCAFRICA via Gen. Ham, the man in charge of AFRICOM at that time. But he also states clearly in the video of his testimony, that Gen. Ham just happened to be in Washington at that time.

“Mr. Hicks testified this morning that the stand down order for the rescue team in Tripoli came from either AFRICOM or SOCAFRICA. General Ham. leader of AFRICOM, may have been in Washington DC at the time.”

“AFRICOM leader General Carter Ham was never given the order to secure the consulate in Benghazi. This is what the general told Rep. Jason Chaffetz after the 9-11 Benghazi terror attack. That means only Barack Obama or Defense Secretary Panetta, the two men above the AFRICOM commander, never ordered an operation to secure the consulate.” Gateway Pundit

Ham claims he was never given the order to send support to Benghazi, but of course he wouldn’t have needed that directive since Libya is in Africa and he was authorized to make that call himself. So the question becomes, who gave him the order to stand down, and as the quote above clearly states, that could only have come from the only two men above him in the pecking order: Panetta and Obama.

5. Conclusion: It’s Isn’t All That Hard to See

Now we are brought back full circle.

From the beginning I have said this was a staged psyop designed to help beef up our AFRICOM operations throughout the whole of Africa.

The Obama administration used a film created and held by the FBI and one of their confidential informants to set the pretext for the attack narrative.

They carefully stage the operation with one of their contractors who have been in our employ since the start of the Libyan destabilization campaign, Ansar al-Shariah.

They put an al-Shariah supporting group in charge of security for that compound, the February 17th Martyrs Brigade, who dutifully took a hike prior to the attack.

The primary victims of the staged attack just happened to have been two men closely associated with that very same group of destabilization contractors.

Those same contractors took those victims to a hospital they controlled.

The state department ignored several warnings from people on the ground inside Libya who saw the preparations taking place for the attacks and then lied about those warnings in the wake of them.

Orders came from the head of AFRICOM to stand down when U.S. forces not party to the agenda wished desperately to respond to the ongoing attack on fellow Americans.

AFRICOM eventually was the beneficiary of the psyop.

The lies and spin that came from the administration in the aftermath of the attacks provide ample evidence that they were desperate to keep certain topics off the table when it came to the press. Topics like Ansar al-Shariah, fore-warnings of the attack, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula’s connections to the FBI, the stand-down orders were all taboo as the Obama administration did their level best to control the narrative of the “Innocence of the Muslims” psyop, but ultimately it failed.

Hillary Clinton eventually used this psyop to sent thousands of U.S. forces to roam around 35 different African nations in an all out invasion of Special Operations on the continent.

She ignored the first request from congress to testify about what happened and then staged some kind of little bump on her head to avoid it again for a couple of months till she and the spin doctors could get the story straight.

And now here we are with the Obama administration holding secret meetings with various friendly news agencies giving them the agreed upon talking points about what really happened.

I just told you what happened. It’s not that hard to see if you fail to forget the things they want you to forget.

Across the right-wing blog-o-sphere they claim to be after the truth of all of this, but they just can’t seem to understand the “why?’ of it all. But it’s as clear as day.

AFRICOM’s true purpose is to seek and destroy African nations and install puppet regimes that are obedient to Washington.  How do they achieve such an outcome?  Create the crises and offer the remedy.  AFRICOM will be the answer.” Timothy Alexander Guzman, Dec.2012

———-

Help keep independent journalism alive. Please consider DONATING to American Everyman BY USING THE DONATE BUTTON ON THE RIGHT. Your donations will help spread authentic  independent investigative journalism to more people across the world.

Thank you.

About these ads

17 Responses

  1. Excellent work in explaining this clearly here. If you would allow a few speculative questions- do you think Stevens and Smith were loyal pawns who were sacrificed anyway, or were they taken out for not going along with the plan? Why did they take Stevens and Smith to the hospital? Why not just leave their dead and mutilated bodies in the consulate for reporters to see to stir up anger? Or are you suggesting they might still be alive? Again, great job.

    • If you remember, there were some interesting aspects to those photos of the “terrorists” picking up Stevens’ body and gently laying it down on the ground. The guy who carried him around for the photo op made sure to support Chris’ head when he put him down. Also, when he had Chris’ body over his shoulder, Chris was remarkably rigid, his back almost straight. His arm was moving in one of the videos.

      They took him to the hospital THEY controlled so they could pronounce him dead with their own doctors, but my guess is since it was Chris and his friend the psyop author, they were simply reassigned to another project, maybe in Jordan or Turkey working on the Syrian destabilization campaign, or somewhere else in Africa. Maybe they were retired together in Dubai or someplace like that with new identities.

      That’s my guess anyway, but since it is just a guess, I didn’t include it in the article.

      • I actually saw a lenghthy piece on my local news about the kids that pulled Stevens out of the annex and took him to the hospital. The kid they were interviewing had cell phone footage and everything. It seemed legit to me. I wish I had the video of that piece.

        Wonder if it was part of the psyop or not. Either way it seemed kind of weird to me tr out of there

        • Stupid phone….continued from above.

          Was trying to say it seemed weird that the country with the most expensive military on the planet couldn’t beat some local bystanders to go pick up the ambassador

          • that’s true. And now we know they could have beat them there and even intervened in the attacks, but were told not to AND the victims were taken to a hospital controlled by those same “terrorists” who used to work for the victims.

            hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…………..

          • I hate my phone as well

  2. While we are in a guessing mood, sometimes I think there may be a real Village, like from the Prisoner. Perhaps they are there, next to Timothy McVeigh. ;)

  3. As much as the communist media wants to just poo poo the benghazi thing away (by comparing it to bushes 911 ironically & they actually have almost have somewhat of a point but 2 wrongs dont equal a right) this youtube video thing is the smoking gun.

    its never the event that gets em in trouble, its the lying that gets em caught up. The movie thing was a PROVEN LIE period.

  4. Benghazigate solved once and for all!

  5. Tarpley points out this is why Ham was fired- thinks it could have been a Romney campaign op- why were Ham and others fired immediately after Obama got in?

    • People lost jobs because it was getting too much attention right before the election and they knew they could keep a lid on it till afterward, but someone had to take the fall. But remember, like those two from the State Department who were fired, they actually just got switched over to different jobs. They weren’t fired at all. Who knows.

      That shows you something about Tarpley. I remember he was saying the Benghazi thing was a Romney October surprise back before the election. Remember that? it was all about the Mormon Mafia in the CIA…. what a laugh. His big thing was we had to get Obama elected to keep the raging Mormon “traitor” out of office. What a joke.

      No. It wasn’t a Romney campaign trick. Ham was in DC when it all went down and he was taking orders from Rumsfeld and Obama. Now he’s taken the fall for it as well like a good soldier is supposed to do. He’ll be compensated with some director’s seats on a few lucrative boards I’m sure.

  6. Excellent post. Really explains the question of motive surrounding Benghazi. It is about Africa.

    Where do you think the Blue Mountain Group figures into this? That British mercenaries were “securing” the embassy is very suspect, especially given the fact that they received the contract only five months before the attack and that the State Department initially denied hiring any foreign contractors to protect the embassy.

    That denial was issued by spokesperson Victoria Nuland, former U.S. Ambassador to NATO (2005-2008) and wife of Robert Kagan, the co-founder (with Anschutz operative Bill Kristol) of PNAC.

  7. Also, that fellow Steven Klein served in the military in Vietnam and spoke of “infiltrating Viet Cong cells,” which means we can safely assume he was in military-intelligence.

    Another story where every single one of the central figures has ties to the national security state of the American Empire.

  8. nice article, although I only scanned it. The why precedes the psyop in that Gaddafi and the other North African regimes wanted to change the trade basis for their oil transactions. Given China’s extensive investment in natural resources around the globe, and particularly in Africa, this was a no-no. Bo didn’t want to sully his Nobel image, hence the lead from behind farce.

    • that’s very true as per the reason behind the invasion of Libya on false pretenses. also part of the justification for the Benghazi psyop as well I suppose after all, Gadhafi was trying to unite African nations under a different banner, trading oil for gold rather than the dollar. Could be part of it, taking out those nations who had been aligned to Libya.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 794 other followers

%d bloggers like this: