Thursday, December 31, 2015

Obama, the Middle East, and Israel Part Fourteen - Turkey

In light of a disturbing (unconfirmed) report, it is time to revisit Benghazi. I wrote the following article back in January about something Trey Gowdy said on Greta van Susteran's show which I knew was an outright lie:
We were running arms from Benghazi through Turkey into Syria. We were arming the "rebels" for years before Congress "voted" on it, in the worst-kept secret in CIA history:
Remembering what I wrote in Part Thirteen - Ramadi, just what might Barry be doing? First, it is no secret that he and Erdogan have been BFFs:
At the same time, he has been cozying up to Iran. As I stated in Part Ten, Turkey and Iran are in a turf war to see who is going to dominate the Middle East. Is Barry playing both sides?
Most likely. In fact, by all appearances, yes. Remember what I have said about Barry: His father's tribe was Shiite, heavily influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood. He spent years in Indonesia, and his mother along with various mentors indoctrinated him with Marxist ideology. So, the only thing he knows for certain is that "The West" is bad. All of that "imperialism" and "colonialism", etc. We are the "bad guys", and anyone fighting against us must therefore be the "good guys".
Allow me to write a disclaimer. I have said this in previous posts, although it has been a few months. I do not believe CIA to be the rogue agency it is portrayed to be by those furthering the anti-government agenda. I have a very clear line in my mind between Barry's shenanigans and the rest of our government. We have good people left; they are just hard to see right now. But I know they are there, and so should my readers.
That being said, sometimes undercover operatives must play along in order to achieve their ultimate goals. Sometimes they do things that, if those things were broadcast on CNN, would look very damning when in reality the operatives are engaging in subterfuge for the purpose of gaining information...and evidence. Try not to forget that.
I have stated before that I believe Michael Morell, and I maintain that position. I have watched and studied him for a while. He is cagey, but so are all intelligence agents. (For a Hillary "shill", he did not do a very good job before Congress.) The trick is to pay close attention to the exact words, and he is very precise. When he said "we" were not running guns to Syria, I believe him. CIA may have been following orders, but they were not acting independently, and frankly I think what they were really doing was monitoring Hillary (read that as "Obama").
Why do I believe that? First, why did Ambassador Stevens initially go to Libya via Greece?
If he was (as is rumored) CIA, and CIA was part of the plot to arm the "rebels" (in both Libya and Syria), why would he not have gone via Turkey? It certainly would have been much easier. Then, let us not forget what Senator Menendez told us about the war that was waged with Hillary vs. Congress and the Pentagon before we got rid of Gaddafi:
Remember something: The goal of Marxism is to get us to distrust our government. Yes, we have bad elements in this administration and no, I am not a fan of big government. But let us not throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. We need a large dose of discernment, and once again I repeat:
Things are not what they appear to be.
So, what is going on in Ramadi? Did we save ISIS leaders? I do not know, but I know this: Turkey is supporting the Islamic State, and since Barry supports Erdogan it stands to reason that he would "help". Unfortunately, I have no concrete answers on this one.
I saw posts on Twitter yesterday demanding to know how our military could engage in such treasonous behavior, and after pondering the story for a few minutes I came up with a possible explanation. Our troops may not have known who they were evacuating. In the military we are taught to follow orders, not to question them, and if we are told to pick up a bunch of people from Ramadi we go and pick up a bunch of people from Ramadi. We do not necessarily know who it is we are "saving". A point to consider, anyway.
More as I have it.