Back to Basics

“I just want to know what the answer is.” - Chris Wallace, May 19, 2013

 Subsequent to a meeting with my primary source inside the intelligence community last week, an individual I refer to as  my “intelligence insider,”  I wrote a column titled The Benghazi deception. Published on Thursday, May 16, 2013, it concerned Barack Hussein Obama’s location and activities on the night of the Benghazi attack when four Americans were murdered during a preplanned attack against a CIA operations compound. My source was extremely emphatic about this particular issue, stating that the Obama administration will never provide a truthful or detailed answer to this question.

“Why,” I asked, “I mean, what could possibly be so damning about his location and activities during the 18 1/2 hour period in question? He was in the White House, correct?” It was here that there was a long, uncomfortable pause as I waited for my answer.

“The White House is a pretty big place, you know,” stated my source in such a way that made it seem that I thought it to be a small, single family home. “I’m telling you, ‘somebody’ in the press will be asking that question and won’t get an answer,” he stated very emphatically. “Just ask the question,” he said, leaving me to wonder momentarily if I was to ask him. “Write about it, and ask the question. Exactly where was Barack Hussein Obama following his 5:00 meeting in the Oval Office until the next day? Where wasn’t he? It’s almost as if the Wizard of Oz himself waved his magic wand to divert attention away from those lost hours. Nobody is asking the question,” he said to me, almost in a scolding manner.

And so I did. I asked the question, using his exact words in my article published last Thursday. What happened within the next 72 hours should also speak to the authenticity of my source.

Sunday, May 19, 2013

It was exactly three days after my article was published when Fox News Sunday host  Chris Wallace asked Daniel Pfeiffer, Assistant to the President of the United States and Senior Adviser to the President for Strategy and Communications the question about Obama’s activities that night. During the approximate five-minute question and answer session, Mr. Wallace asked Pfeiffer no fewer than eight times where Obama was and what he was doing as events in Benghazi were unfolding.

The following portion of the exchange was excerpted directly from the show video transcript and illustrates the attempts by Mr. Wallace to get a single, straightforward answer to one simple question (edited for brevity; highlights by this author):

WALLACE: OK. Let’s turn to Benghazi… Question, what did the president do the rest of that night to pursue Benghazi?

….

WALLACE: But with due respect, you didn’t answer my question. What did the president do that night?

PFEIFFER: He was talking to his national security staff, his National Security Council, the people who keep him up to date about briefings as they happen.

WALLACE: Was he in the Situation Room?

PFEIFFER: He was kept up to date throughout the day.

WALLACE: Do you not know whether he was in the Situation Room?

PFEIFFER: I don’t remember what room the president was in on that night. And that’s a largely irrelevant fact.

WALLACE: Well –

WALLACE: Here’s the point, though.

The Truth behind the Holder Justice Department’s search for leaks

What’s one of the most effective and expedient methods of taking an incident that is true and making it not only appear false, but outrageously and demonstrably false? You know the kind of false I mean… the “urban legend” type of false, causing anyone who hears about the incident to immediately dismiss it and attack the messengers as  conspiracy nuts?

The answer is playing out, in real time, right before all of us, and we all need to understand the methods that are being used to cover the lie. To answer the question, though, is for a government official or agency to take what is true, wrap it in the bait of a larger lie where the larger, more outrageous lie is proven to be untrue. Soon, people don’t know what to believe, so they discount the entire story, even (and especially) the kernel of truth covered by the lie. Then, when anyone refers to the incident, they are told that the entire story was proven false.

I am referring to the allegations that the Holder Justice Department “wiretapped” the cloakrooms, or the private, “members-only” areas just off the floor of the House and Senate. The story originated with the disclosure that the Associated Press received a letter from the Holder Justice Department last week stating that the government had obtained two months of telephone records that included each incoming and outgoing telephone number and the length of each call for over 20 different lines used reporters. Additionally, the records also included personal lines for reporters and phones in the congressional press gallery.

Since the story broke, some lawmakers and others have gone public to decry the allegations that the Holder Justice Department “wiretapped” the Cloak Room. Wiretapping indicates real-time telephonic surveillance of the phone lines by Holder’s agents. Wiretapping is, of course, the incorrect word to describe the DOJ’s attack on our separation of powers through the questionable, if not illegal use of his agency’s powers in a manner that seems to summon the ghost of J. Edgar Hoover during the darkest of times. The incorrect use of the word wiretapping was about all the tyrannical despots within the Obama regime needed to immediately and forcefully deny that any such surveillance had taken place – and be technically correct. Thus began the clever word games.

The truth, however, is even far more disturbing than the big lie. According to one intelligence official close to the situation who provided information specific to this incident, Holder’s Justice Department not only attacked the sacred separation of powers through his agency’s actions by obtaining the aforementioned telephone records, but what has yet to be disclosed is that all electronic communications data was included in this overreach. According to this source, the records not only included those within the Cloak room, but in other areas throughout and within the Capitol. Not in real time, of course, so as to maintain the infamous Nixonian plausible deniability amid the semantics serving to sully the truth.

The purpose is to identify the media contacts used by members of the House and Senate as they look for leaks in the house of the people.

It is interesting that the corporate media, like sharks attracted to chum in the water, is just now appearing to treat Benghazi as a political scandal similar to Watergate that took down former U.S. President Richard M. Nixon in his second term. While many people see the comparison, I not only see the comparison, but also sense a collusion of a different, more nefarious and less conspicuous type as well.

As the details of Benghazi are beginning to emerge from “whistleblowers” and the murderous events are being rightfully elevated to the proper realm of criminal conspiracy, other scandals have suddenly seemed to erupt, almost as if cued by a complicit choreographer. Most egregious misdeeds of the Internal Revenue Service, for example, that allegedly targeted Conservative groups, from 501(c)3 organizations to any group with Tea party or Constitution in their names, were suddenly “revealed.”

Other scandals of lesser significance, but nonetheless poking at the embers of public ire and intolerance are popping up as well. Watching the people who are reading the multiple news headlines on various news aggregation sites are like watching spectators at Wimbledon, as their heads move from side to side as they follow the ball in play.  The white noise of new problems are constantly erupting, resulting in a feeding frenzy in the waters surrounding the Executive branch.

While fascinating to watch, has anyone stopped to consider that the process of chumming the waters with a flurry of cascading news events, combined with a docu-dump of 100 pages of Benghazi e-mails is actually a methodically orchestrated diversion? What is it we are not supposed to be seeing amid the white noise of new controversies of varying values? Are we being told that we’re aboard the Queen Mary and being directed to look over the port side at the antics of the sharks attracted by the chumming of the waters while we’re actually aboard the RMS Lusitania sailing through the Irish Channel on the afternoon of May 7, 1915? Meanwhile, a torpedo fired from a German U-boat is traveling directly for our starboard side, and is about to take the entire ship down.

Like a levy that has been suspiciously breached, the informational flood created by these news events is without recent precedent. The timing of this flood is of particularly critical importance. The headlines are diverting our attention away from a critical window of investigative value relating to Benghazi. Could it be that we’re seeing a form of force majeure being implemented to overwhelm and distract us from something far more important to truth seekers and consequently, much more lethal to Obama’s second term? Perhaps the Cloward-Piven strategy adapted and modified for the modern news cycles of today?

The Watergate-Benghazi time continuum

It has become common practice to use the Watergate “scandal” as the basis for any controversy involving the President or the White House, having set some arbitrary high-water mark for behavioral tolerance involving a sitting president. Watergate is commonly used to describe an intricate web of criminal deception that took place during former President Richard Nixon’s second term in the White House, and is routinely identified as the cause that brought down Nixon’s presidency.

Every American gun owner, regardless of the state in which you live, is presently or will be the target of gun confiscation. A state-by-state framework of confiscation is being erected in front of us all to strip us of our rights under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Proof of this nefarious intent of disarming citizens was serendipitously caught by a “hot” microphone at the conclusion of the May 9, 2013 meeting of the New Jersey State Legislature.

At the conclusion of the New Jersey Senate Budget & Appropriations Committee meeting last Thursday, an open microphone caught three state senators, identified by voice as Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg, Assistant Majority Leader Sandra Cunningham, Senate Majority Whip Linda Greenstein, and at least one staff member talking candidly about their intent to confiscate all guns from the people they serve. It should be noted that Senator Loretta Weinberg is the chief proponent of the anti-gun legislation being moved through the New Jersey State Senate.

Although some of the candid conversation is a bit difficult to discern due to the ambient noise, their message is clear. “We need[ed] a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate,” stated one high ranking senate member. “They don’t care about the bad guys.  All they want to do is have their ‘little guns’ and do whatever they want with them,” added another in an obviously demeaning manner. Another conceded that gun owners do, in fact, want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but added that “they don’t have any regulations to do it.” Oh really?

For anyone doubting the bitter contempt these legislators hold for gun owners and pro-Constitutionalists, a YouTube video that captured the “open microphone moment” is available for review here.

During the second hour of The Hagmann & Hagmann Report that aired last night, we interviewed the highly credentialed Scott Bach, Esq., Executive Director of the Association of the New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs who explained the draconian laws being written and passed in the State of New Jersey. “Clearly, this is about nothing less than disarming the American public, and the current battleground is in New Jersey,”  stated Mr. Bach. “You might not be experiencing it in your state… yet, but you will. It’s just a matter of time.”

We must do everything we can to preserve, protect and defend our Second Amendment rights, or we will lose much more. Regardless of where you live, the fight is coming to you, if it has not yet arrived. We must be proactive, and yes, we can make our voices heard to counter the utter contempt of these lawmakers regardless of your state of residence – while we still have the chance. Let’s hold these opponents to our constitutional rights accountable for their words and actions.

The time is now, and the fight has been left to us. Make your views known and your voice heard by contacting the NJ Senate Majority Office by phone (609-847-3700) and/or fax (609-633-7254). Do it before it disappears as an option.

More information: Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs – A grassroots organization fighting to preserve our Second Amendment rights.

It was during the “time critical” research project on which I have been feverishly working, trying to separate facts from myth while up against a looming deadline that my thoughts drifted to this year’s Mother’s Day holiday in America and, naturally, my own mother. Pardon me while I drift for a moment, and humbly ask you to accompany me along my brief journey away from my research and whatever it is that you might be in the midst of doing that seemingly requires your immediate attention.

Perhaps like me, you feel that there are so many pressing issues we are being forced to handle that it becomes overwhelming and most frustrating at times, and the last thing we need is yet another “holiday” thrust upon us. As I work at trying to complete a time sensitive project, you might also be engaged in projects or duties that are equally time sensitive, but for different reasons. Perhaps it’s the completion of a job so you can collect your pay, or finishing seemingly mundane tasks that need to be done just like every other day of your life. Perhaps you are thinking that the last thing you want or need is the inconvenience of a slickly manufactured holiday that seems like a backdoor stimulus for retailers of candy, flowers and cards.

As the clock continues to count down the remaining minutes I have to complete my task, I find myself quietly cursing the evil genius of whoever thought up Mother’s Day and the “forced inconvenience” of it all. Today, alone in my office except for the companionship of my slumbering German Shepherd,  my cynicism toward the intent of the holiday grew even as I tried to rid myself of all distractions so I could complete my report. I unplugged the telephone, turned off my e-mail, and muted the TV monitor displaying breaking news headlines.

After a marathon session of research and writing, I feel like I am still fighting the prospect of the “forced” Mother’s Day holiday that is taking me off task and increasing my level of personal frustration. As I often do when I’m stuck in a mode of mental paralysis, I reached for my dog’s leash, which was all it took for him to wake up and stand at the ready. What focus, I thought of my canine’s attentiveness, as we exited my office and walked to “our” spot, a secluded area of trees and wildflowers beginning to bloom. No noise of traffic, radios, or incessantly ringing telephones. It was just the noise made by the rustling of the wildlife and foliage, along with the occasional grunt of a rather verbose German Shepherd who loves the outdoors. It was only then that I allowed myself to consider the thoughts of my own mother and Mother’s Day, and my life as her only son and only child.

It was at this moment that I recalled the last Mother’s Day we spent together, and how I felt that that it was more out of obligation to the holiday itself than to her honor. I recalled that she sensed my feeling of obligation as well, as she said to me that she knew I was busy and did not need to spend the day with her.

We’re rapidly approaching a potential checkmate moment in the Mideast. There are 41 nations plus the U.S., for a total of 42 nations currently participating in military maneuvers off the coast of Iran. Despite all of the saber rattling about Iran, we are being deceived about the coming global battle, which will almost certainly begin in Syria, not Iran.

What we are seeing is both deadly serious and under-appreciated by most Westerners, who have grown weary of wars and rumors of wars in the Mideast long ago. Exhaustion aside, the events continue to march forward, the consolidation of forces and interests are forming until that final moment when we will have a single group of tyrannical global controllers left standing. A checkmate moment, where the aspirations of the globalists will have succeeded in a plan of global domination, consolidation of power, energy and wealth, all obtained from the blood and bodies of our family members fighting a war without our consent.

It was during the darkest hours of last Sunday morning, during the time that exists when sunrise seems so distant and the stillness of the night that keeps most of humanity in the Western hemisphere in a deep slumber. It was then I began to contemplate the best way to report the complexities behind the recent bombings near Damascus of missile storage facilities and the missiles themselves by Israel. Even at this early hour, the media already had their talking points well refined, preparing to hold captive their audience by asserting that the strikes took place in the readily accepted historical context of a limited Israeli action against their regional Arab enemy protagonists. A short, sharp, precise operation with a beginning and an end all in a tidy time period. Except it’s not. Not this time. We are seeing something much different… a step in the path to global war.

I was troubled by this inaccurate description of events, like many of you who are reading this, as we know that what we are seeing is part of something much larger and much more ominous take place. It was here, on this very site that I wrote about the beginning of World War III… and that it would not start with Iran, but with Syria. The death race to Damascus by an agenda so nefarious that it could only be ascribed to an unseen evil. Yet, my treatise was called hyperbole by some, and described as the writings of an alarmist by others. While I discount the former, I happily embrace characterizations of the latter knowing that we are witnessing events that cannot be “walked back.” We are watching the end stages of a larger agenda play out before us, while those in power and the media want us to believe otherwise.

It was during this darkness that I decided to turn on my television for updates from the media with which most Americans are so enamored, and by which they are so controlled. At this early hour, I stumbled across an infomercial selling DVDs of old television variety shows from a seemingly much simpler time, momentarily taking me away from my task.

It will be exactly 40 years ago this May 17th that the Senate Watergate Committee, a special, broad committee convened by the United States Senate, began hearings to investigate the Watergate burglaries and a criminal cover-up of those activities. At the epicenter of those hearings was then-President Richard Nixon. Just over a year later, the committee released its 1,254 page report of findings. When the dust settled, forty administration officials were indicted and several of Nixon’s aides were charged and convicted for obstruction of justice and other crimes.

A cover-up pointed directly to the White House. Facing impeachment proceedings, then-President Richard M. Nixon resigned, assuming his place in American history as the only president ever to resign. It was described as the worst scandal in U.S. history… perhaps until now.

If history tells us anything, it tells us that it’s not just about the crime, it’s also about the cover-up. It’s about seeking the truth but being stonewalled at every turn, and being treated as subjects undeserving of the truth rather than citizens asking reasonable questions but being denied answers.

The same level of inquiries that unraveled the complexities of the Watergate cover-up are required to unravel the ball of lies that surrounds the September 11, 2012 attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including a sitting U.S. Ambassador. Within this ball of lies, however, exists not only the covert agenda of an administration, but the fate of the world. Unraveling this ball of lies will reveal official government actions that have been and continue to be performed in our name but without our consent. It will reveal a government agenda that has have spun wildly out of control, leaving no one accountable as we stand at a very critical moment in world history. It’s about a cover-up of monumental proportions that is reminiscent of, but hardly in league with, the cover-up of a generation ago.

Today, the stakes are much higher, as we stand at the precipice of a global conflict because of deeds being done in our name under a level of unprecedented and unchecked deception. Ultimately, it’s about getting the truth, which has been kept from each of us through lies of commission and omission, clever semantics, and outright refusals to provide answers to important questions. We were force-fed a preplanned lie from day one, much like the thinly veiled cover story of the Watergate burglary, but with much greater consequences.

All investigations, however, must have a beginning. On May 8, 2013, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will conduct a single, day-long hearing on the events that took place in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including a U.S. ambassador.  Interestingly, the hearing is being conducted under the title Benghazi: Exposing Failure and Recognizing Courage.

This one day hearing is being convened to “examine evidence that Obama Administration officials have attempted to suppress information about errors and reckless misjudgments,” and will include some witness testimony. That seems to be a fairly ambitious agenda for a single day of investigation in Washington. It is, however, a start, and an opportunity for all Americans to see just how deep the lies go.

Demanding answers

The hearing is a result, in part, of the “interim progress report” released by the House committee on Benghazi last week.

As the events in Boston played out over the last two weeks, one facet of this administration’s actions kept troubling me.  I couldn’t quite see it through the dense fog of information and accusations at first, but then in the dark of a restless night after my oral surgery a few days ago, I looked skyward and asked God Almighty for some light on the big picture, because I’m a “big picture, bottom line” kind of guy.  It seemed that within seconds, the clouds overhead began to break, and out of the darkness rose a full moon.  Somehow it seemed like an answer, but how?

I thought about my family and friends and then about my country and the world.  I tend to be a little dense at times and it still wasn’t quite clear to me what the moon rising on the horizon had to do with my hope for divinely inspired insights and revelations.  Amid the haze of my pain and medication, I startled myself by talking out loud to the Almighty, perhaps a bit too testily for which I hope I will be forgiven. “Don’t you see,” I fumed, “I’m just trying to get some perspective on our situation. How can I help people if I can’t get their attention on the big problems looming right in front of us?”

Perhaps it was the medication, but for the life of me I thought I heard God chuckle a  bit as I just stood there staring at the odd moonlit shapes and shadows around me.  It’s strange how moonlight makes the colors go away, turning everything monochrome.  The dark shadows of a rising moon distort and lie about what is really around you.  The buds and flowers on the oak and cherry tree branches which seemed so beautiful and reassuring on the previous spring afternoon suddenly become foreboding and stark.  The slightest, rustling breeze puts one’s senses on edge, seeing what your imagination is hearing.

Bad moon rising

Standing in the darkness, my thoughts wandered to a song from my youth by Credence Clearwater Revival, Bad Moon Rising. The lyrics were well imprinted in my subconscious: “I see the bad moon arising. I see trouble on the way. I see earthquakes and lightnin’. I see bad times today. Don’t go around tonight, well, it’s bound to take your life, there’s a bad moon on the rise.”

I already felt sick and the thoughts induced by that rock scripture weren’t very comforting.  Not being one to leave fate completely to chance, I walked back inside where I chased a couple more pills with some clear water in pursuit of my own “revival.”  While waiting for the promised relief I took a deep breath and badgered the Almighty yet again, clearly showing my heightened exasperation, for which I have since apologized.

We are witnessing one of the biggest government cover-ups since Watergate. A cover-up that involves murder, arms trafficking, and lies by high ranking officials under oath. It involves the murderous attacks in Benghazi, and congressional investigators just released a 46-page interim progress report that at least exposes Hillary Rodham Clinton and the White House lying under oath. Where’s the accountability? Where’s the outrage? Where’s the media?

A 46-page interim progress report of an ongoing investigation across five House Committees by the U.S. House of Representatives was released on Tuesday, April 23, 2013. The executive summary states that former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton signed off on a reduction of diplomatic security forces suggesting that this reduction of security was, in large part, to blame for the attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012.  The report emphasizes that this is “inconsistent” with her sworn testimony of January 23, 2013. Simply stated, Hillary Rodham Clinton lied under oath to congressional investigators.

Additionally, the interim report states that official press talking points issued by the U.S. intelligence community were altered by the White House and Senior State Department officials on Saturday, September 15, 2012 for the sole purpose of protecting the State Department. It was emphasized that these alterations were not for protecting any classified information whatsoever.

For those of us heavily involved in investigating and reporting the events in Benghazi, the interim report merely confirms what we’ve long known. But what isn’t being addressed by this report or elsewhere? Here is what you are not being told.

The security issue is a diversion

Much like blaming some obscure internet video for the motivation behind the attacks, everyone, including government investigators, is citing insufficient pre-attack diplomatic security for the deaths of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. While such security for the American embassy in Tripoli was indeed a concern, it is not the key issue, but a diversion from the real issue. The real issue will open up a Pandora’s box of criminal activity the likes of which that would rock our nation to its very core.

As I have written in past investigative reports, there was never an embassy or consulate in Benghazi. Now innocuously referenced in this report as the “Benghazi mission,” the facilities in Benghazi served as a logistics center for arms and weapons transfers from Libya ultimately destined for the anti-Assad terrorists in Syria. It was used by the “State Department’s CIA,” which is quite different than the actual CIA known by Americans. It is here that I am providing a little known fact, albeit one that creates angst among those seventh floor occupants of the official CIA headquarters and in the uppermost echelons of the U.S. State Department.

In actuality, there are two Central Intelligence Agencies – unofficially, of course. The most “unofficial” agency works under the diplomatic cover of the U.S. State Department. It is in this venue where we will find the trinkets of treason inside Pandora’s box. It is here that the components of treason exist, covered by a cache of weapons and the bodies of the dead.

What do the murders of four Americans in Benghazi have to do with the murders of three in a terrorist attack in Boston? Plenty, if you understand what you are seeing in the abstract expressionism of the Jackson Pollock painting is actually a blood trail, and the Pollock painting you are closely studying is an exact reproduction of one of his earlier works. It is a reproduction of a reproduction. We’ve seen this picture before, a bloodstained tangle of lies being sold to us as an artistic masterpiece. But you have to step farther back, not closer to the painting, to actually see the blood trail.

Does anyone still remember the terror attack and murders of Americans in Benghazi on September 11, 2012? Does anyone still care? How about the indignation shown by Obama’s then Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on January 23, 2013 when being questioned by Senator Johnson about whether the American people were misled about the motive for the attacks? Animated and agitated, Clinton never did answer the question, instead waving her arms and pounding her fist on the table before her in a decidedly undiplomatic like fashion while shedding absolutely no light on what she knew and when she knew it.

Her response was dreadfully shrill yet non-committal, instead rebuking the Senator for seeking the truth with “Was it because of a protest, or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”

In the wake of the bombings in Boston and amid information the government and media does not want you, the average American citizen to know, motive and causation make a lot of difference. Compare Clinton’s terse response to questions surrounding Benghazi with that of Department of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, whose testosterone levels rose sharply as she decided that she would not even dignify Congressman Jeff Duncan’s questioning this week about the reported involvement of a Saudi national identified as Abdulrahman Ali Isa al-Salami al-Harbi, a/k/a Abdulrahman al Harbi.

The Saudi connections

In the event you don’t recognize that name associated with the Boston bombing, the media initially reported that a Saudi national, later determined to be al Harbi, was under guard at a Boston hospital after being injured in the attack. He was seen running from the explosions and tackled by police a short distance from the bombing site. During the normal investigative process of al Harbi, investigators learned that he was reportedly the subject of an alleged deportation order under Section 212 3B Immigration & Nationality Act regarding “Security and related grounds – Terrorist Activities, but completely unrelated to Boston. To get on this list requires some pretty substantial evidence. To be removed from this list is practically impossible, short of detention or death.

Amid the flurry of media reports that followed, however, his name and status at the hospital were gradually and methodically being erased from news reports and people’s memories. An intentional government and media brown-out turned into a noticeable blackout, even while federal authorities were searching his fifth floor apartment at 364 Ocean Avenue, Revere, MA and removing various items for forensic analysis.