Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria

Kerry has said: “the bombing begins Thursday.”

Here is an important headline from Tuesday, from the UK Telegraph:

Saudi Arabia has secretly offered Russia a sweeping deal to control the global oil market and safeguard Russia’s gas contracts, if the Kremlin backs away from the Assad regime in Syria.

The strategic jitters pushed Brent crude prices to a five-month high of $112 a barrel. “We are only one incident away from a serious oil spike. The market is a lot tighter than people think,” said Chris Skrebowski, editor of Petroleum Review.

Leaked transcripts of a closed-door meeting between Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan shed an extraordinary light on the hard-nosed Realpolitik of the two sides.

That said, where does it leave the United States?  Hanging precariously?  Promises of oil contracts denied?  Broken?

Or does Saudi Arabia fear Russia — and its potential response — more than it fears the United States?

President Putin has long been pushing for a global gas cartel, issuing the `Moscow Declaration’ last to month “defend suppliers and resist unfair pressure”. This would entail beefing up the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF), a talking shop. 

Apparently, a clear Russian intervention if the US and/or other countries involve themselves in Syria.

The Putin-Bandar meeting was stormy, replete with warnings of a “dramatic turn” in Syria. Mr Putin was unmoved by the Saudi offer, though western pressure has escalated since then. “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters,” he said, referring to footage showing a Jihadist rebel eating the heart and liver of a Syrian soldier.

Prince Bandar in turn warned that there can be “no escape from the military option” if Russia declines the olive branch. Events are unfolding exactly as he foretold.

Are you listening, Mr Obama?




Attorney for Whistleblower: 400 US Missiles Stolen in Benghazi

Clinton & Benghazi Lies


On August 12, Joe DiGenova, attorney for one of the Benghazi whistleblowers, told Washington D.C.’s WMAL that one of the reasons people have remained tight-lipped about Benghazi is because 400 U.S. missiles were “diverted to Libya” and ended up being stolen and falling into “the hands of some very ugly people.”

DiGenova represents Benghazi whistleblower Mark Thompson. He told WMAL that he “does not know whether [the missiles] were at the annex, but it is clear the annex was somehow involved in the distribution of those missiles.”

He claimed his information “comes from a former intelligence official who stayed in constant contact with people in the special ops and intelligence community.” He said the biggest concern right now is finding those missiles before they can be put to use. “They are worried, specifically according to these sources, about an attempt to shoot down an airliner,” he claimed.

Is this the unspoken nasty secret surrounding Benghazi and the reason the current administration thinks those four deaths mean nothing?  And why they’ll do anything to cover it up and minimize it to their best extent?

Perhaps this paragraph will shed some light:

Months earlier, following then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s February 7 testimony on Capitol Hill about the Benghazi attacks, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) suggested that one of the causes behind the terrorist attack “may have been that there was a gun running operation going on in Benghazi, leaving Libya and going to Turkey and [distributing] arms to the [Syrian] rebels.”

As may perhaps my previous posts here and here and here and here.

But no one seems to care.

Which tells me one thing: never work for the federal government.  Your death means nothing.




Trey Gowdy: Obama administration HIDING survivors of Benghazi

From the Greta Van Susteren show on Fox:

Trey Gowdy weighs in:

In an appearance on Fox News’ show ‘On The Record’ with Greta Van Susteren, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) said the Obama Administration is hiding the survivors of the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Gowdy also told Greta that the administration is dispersing the survivors to locations around the country, and also changing their names.

“Stop and think what things are most calculated to get at the truth? Talk to people with first-hand knowledge. What creates the appearance and perhaps the reality of a cover-up? Not letting us talk with people who have the most amount of information, dispersing them around the country and changing their names,”

But is this information bleated on every front page of every newspaper in this great nation?  On every American TV, internet and radio network?

Of course not.  Because such information would damage the wondrous and stupendous Administration of Barack Hussein Obama, and create doubt in the hearts of those who would consider the Next Big Demorat for president, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

A “phony scandal,” ladies and gentlemen?  Just why would you go so far out of your way to purposely cover up a so-called “phony scandal,” pray tell?

No, I will not let Benghazi die, damn me to Hell.




More on Benghazi: “CIA running arms smuggling,” and “Dozens of CIA operatives on the ground during Benghazi attack”

Hillary Clinton Liar1.   From the UKTelegraph (and not the American Media Maggots, notedly):

CIA ‘running arms smuggling team in Benghazi when consulate was attacked’

The CIA has been subjecting operatives to monthly polygraph tests in an attempt to suppress details of a US arms smuggling operation in Benghazi that was ongoing when its ambassador was killed by a mob in the city last year, according to reports.

The circumstances of the attack are a subject of deep division in the US with some Congressional leaders pressing for a wide-ranging investigation into suspicions that the government has withheld details of its activities in the Libyan city.

The television network said that a CIA team was working in an annex near the consulate on a project to supply missiles from Libyan armouries to Syrian rebels.

Sources said that more Americans were hurt in the assault spearheaded by suspected Islamic radicals than had been previously reported. CIA chiefs were actively working to ensure the real nature of its operations in the city did not get out.

So only the losses suffered by the State Department in the city had been reported to Congress.

Does this shock and surprise?  The State Department — under Hillary Clinton — lying to Congress?

2.  Exclusive: Dozens of CIA operatives on the ground during Benghazi attack

From CNN’s Jake Tapper:

CNN has uncovered exclusive new information about what is allegedly happening at the CIA, in the wake of the deadly Benghazi terror attack.

Four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed in the assault by armed militants last September 11 in eastern Libya.

Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.

CNN has learned the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency’s Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.

Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency’s missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency’s workings.

The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.

It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career.

So: more clandestine gun-running on behalf of the loving, understanding, kinder, gentler, more sensitive and certainly more transparent Obama Administration?

Facts in evidence.

And no, I’m not dropping the topic.




The Clinton & DC Elite: “What difference does it make?”

Secretary of State — soon to be former — Hillary Clinton “testified” at a hearing on Wednesday, providing essentially no further insight into the attack on the Benghazi consulate in Libya back on September 11th of 2012.

Because, after all, “what difference does it make?”

You arrogant Leftist Elitist Hack, it makes all the difference in the world.

And you just contravened yourself.  Your deflection of the key issue bespeaks volumes about you, ma’am.  YOU are responsible — as you already admitted.  It occurred on your watch.  And, so, why weren’t the embassies and consulates and, in particular, the Benghazi Consulate on the highest of alert on that very important date and — further — why were additional security updates and the adding of security personnel for Benghazi refused for that station?  No, not ignored; actually refused.  It was not an issue of budget; that response is specious and incorrect.  Did you not read the cables?  Did you not read the requests for help?  Why was there no Marine presence?  Where in the hell were the Marines?  There was a 16-personnel security system turned down.  This was, literally, a War Zone.  It is inexcusable.  We had the resources.  And we didn’t deploy them.  I submit: PURPOSELY.

And you take the easy “broken female” way out: the Waterworks.  Shameful.

Clinton did nothing but pontificate and insult not only her position but the entire political system in DC as well as all of the citizens of the United States — who deserve clear and truthful answers.  She attempted jousting; she attempted witty reparte; she attempted, for five-and-a-half hours, to deflect as much as possible to some GOP questioners who couldn’t conduct a half-witted interview or interrogation for Lagos PD in Nigeria, much less sit in an open Congressional session and pose cogently crafted, logical questions in succession.  The GOP had, quite literally, FOUR MONTHS to prepare for this session.

There is nobody in custody.  There is no apparent investigation continuing.  We have a right to know the answers to all our questions.  Are we adequately protecting our embassies?  Our consulates?  In war zones?

From Rand Paul:

“Ultimately, I think with your leaving, you accept culpability for the greatest tragedy since 9/11,” he said. “Had I been President at the time and I found out you had not read the cables… I would have relieved you of your post.”

“I think it’s inexcusable,” he added.

And then Rand Paul NAILS IT:

Finally: why is there no clear timeline of this event proffered and immured and provided in a transparent fashion by anyone on either side of the aisle?

No.  There is no such thing — for an assault on sovereign American territory taking only second place to the 9/11 attack itself, since that date.

Which makes me ask: does anyone actually want to get to the bottom of the four deaths in Benghazi?

Because this — this farce, this Kabuki Theater — is eliciting nothing valuable for the nation, its citizens, its taxpayers.  Which tells me: we’ll learn nothing from this.  So the bottom line becomes: four American citizens died for no reason whatsoever.

All DC did was cover their shit like any average cat in a sandbox.


Kabuki Theatre