WHAT WAS THE MOTIVE FOR MURDER AT BENGHAZI?  A year has passed since the Incident at Benghazi took the life of ambassador Chris Stevens and other Americans. Some shapes have emerged from the fog that still hangs over Benghazi, yet many unanswered questions remain about what happened there.  Was an order to stand down given to stop aide from reaching Benghazi? If so, who gave the order? What was ambassador Stevens doing at Benghazi? How did the ambassador die? Was he murdered?  Beyond these questions, one of the most important questions not being asked is what was the motive, in the first place, for the al-Queda attack against our CIA outpost in Benghazi and the resulting deaths?  Investigators will tell you that discovering the motive for a crime goes a long way to understanding who committed it. Furthermore, any theory about a crime also searches for a motive so that scattered pieces of evidence can be assembled to form a complete picture of events.  So far, very few are asking about the motive for the attack at Benghazi. If ambassador Stevens was murdered, how did that murder take place and what was the motive for that crime?  The official explanation for the Incident at Benghazi is that it was a spontaneous demonstration protesting a video that was seen by the attackers as insulting to the Prophet and Islam.  We know now that official explanation for a motive is a lie perpetuated by members of the Obama administration and the US State Department.  What other motives for Stevens' murder are there, if the official one is a lie? Why aren't others asking about these motives if they know the official explanation is not true?  Two other motives for Steven's death have been circulating on the Internet. These motives for Stevens' death use the evidence for gunrunning and the anti-Muslim video in a much broader explanation.  Let's look at these motives and see how they fit into a theory of the crime.  It is generally agreed that some kind of gun running was taking place at Benghazi and that ambassador Stevens was a party to it. Weapons were probably collected by the CIA from the old Libyan regime and assembled at Benghazi for transport via Turkey to the rebels fighting Assad in Syria.  If this were the case, then something must have gone wrong in the weapons exchange that caused the attack to take place and Stevens to die. What could have that been?  It's highly unlikely that forces loyal to the Kadhafi regime could have attacked the CIA compound at Benghazi, without Stevens and the more that 30 Americans stationed there not knowing about the attack before hand.  If all parties in the weapons exchange were making money by it, what would be their motive for attacking and killing Stevens? It would be like biting the hand that feeds them  This being the case, there seems to be no motive in this explanation for killing Stevens and stopping the flow of money and weapons.  Is there another motive that builds on the weapons exchange and the video protests that leads to Stevens alleged torture, mutilation and murder?  It has been suggested that Stevens' death and the destruction at Benghazi were the result of a foiled plot to kidnap the ambassador and exchange him for the Blind Sheik who is held in a US prison.  This suggestion may be far fetched. But it does offer us the best motive for our theory of the crime.  Let us assume the kidnapping plot was hatched by the US and the Muslim Brotherhood. A video was on the shelf and ready to be offered as a motive to cover the plot.  Then, after negotiations, both Stevens and the Blind Sheik would be exchanged, the arms shipments could continue, and Obama would be reelected. A good plan with a good outcome for many.  But something went wrong. The kidnappers and Stevens did not count on resistance offered by other brave Americans who were not in the loop.  When the "attack" at Benghazi took place, members of the administration knew before hand it was not a terrorist attack, but a staged kidnapping they would later explain by a preselected video. That's why a stand down order was given.  However, not everyone was ready to stand down. Woods, and later Doherty, thought the attack was real and they responded like the brave Americans they were. They came out shooting.  This resistance was a surprise to the attackers who were planning on no resistance and an easy kidnapping. When some of the attackers were killed, things got out of control.  The attackers, many who may have had Muslim Brotherhood ties in Egypt, felt betrayed and angry. They took their anger out on ambassador Stevens.  It was this anger that led to Stevens' alleged torture and death. The motive for Stevens' murder seems to be revenge.  Once things fell apart at Benghazi, the administration made a decision to go with the cover story they already had on the shelf–blame it on the video, lie, and hope for the best.  Hoping for the best may have its limits. Now that deposed President Morsi has been released by the Egyptian military, some new light is being shed on what happened at Benghazi. The recent statement by Egypt's ambassador to Britain, Ashraf ElKholy does just that.  ElKholy claims, "The Muslim Brotherhood are like a Nazi group that demand that everything changes and people everything to their way." How could the Clintons have been so blind to have missed that foreign policy assessment about the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/10252399/Muslim-Brotherhood-must-be-removed-like-Nazis-Egypts-ambassador-to-Britain-says.html  But beyond this characterization of the Muslim Brotherhood as Nazis, could there possibly be any connection between Hillary Clinton, Egypt's Morsi and the alleged kidnapping of ambassador Stevens at Benghazi?  There is evidence that Morsi's men were at Benghazi. What were they doing there? http://therightscoop.com/new-evidence-connecting-egypts-president-morsi-to-911-attack-on-consulate-in-benghazi/  If there was a plan to kidnap Stevens and trade him for the release of the Blind Sheik, that plan could have been hatched in the State Department.  It would be in the interest of the Clintons to have Obama reelected, even if they do not like him. If a Republican were to have defeated Obama, that would have put Hillary's chance to run for election 8 years into the future. By then she may have been too old or too unpopular to become the first US woman president.  Any scheme that would accomplish the Obama reelection goal and firm up ties with the Muslim Brotherhood could be of interest to the Clintons. We know that Huma Abedin is Hillary Clinton's assistant and sister of Egyptian MB Chief Hassan Abedin. Both the Clintons and Obama have ties with Morsi, so Morsi and the Brotherhood could have been involved in any plot from the beginning.  If the US State Department wanted to plan a staged kidnapping of a US ambassador, it would not be hard to do. It could easily be done under the cover of a CIA gun running program that was already taking place at Benghazi.  Cynthia Farahat reported recently on FoxNews.com that "Ahmed Moussa, a prominent Egyptian television personality on the Tahrir TV channel as well as a former officer in Egyptian State Security Intelligence (SSI), went public on July 30 with a remarkable piece of information."  "...Moussa announced three facts: 1. Ambassador Chris Stevens' assassin in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012, is named Mohsen Al-Azazi. 2. Azizi associates with...the general secretary of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party... and Hegazy, a leading MB cleric. 3. The police found Azizi’s passport in the house of leading Muslim Brotherhood strategist Khairat El-Shater..." http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/08/12/is-muslim-brotherhood-working-together-with-amb-chris-stevens-assassin/#ixzz2cPoW7pmG  Furthermore, Bill Gertz claims in The Counter Jihard Report that, "An al Qaeda terrorist stated in a recent online posting that U. S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens was killed by lethal injection after plans to kidnap him during the Sept. 11 attacks in Benghazi went bad." http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/ambassador-christopher-stevens/  Could it be that ambassador Stevens' close ties to Islam made him a likely candidate for such a kidnapping plot? Sabri Malek, the spokesman for the Democratic Party in Libya, claims Stevens, "had a very personal private matter, a very romantic relationship with the mystical side of Islam."  Malek continued, "He always felt that he belonged to the Libyan community and the society...He was one of us. He had a habit of going down the local street …going to a very famous bar, it’s like a fruit bar where he takes his milkshakes…hardly with any security." http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/murdered-u-s-ambassador-stevens-a-muslim/  This is where we are today–a year long lie by the administration, while no other motive for Stevens' death, besides the above speculation, is being investigated either by the media or the Congress.  TWO THEORIES ABOUT BENGHAZI: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/57011
By Barbara Starr
 
 When U.S. commandos grabbed a former al Qaeda operative in Tripoli this month, American forces were just hours away from potentially launching a more dangerous covert raid to capture a militia figure facing charges in the deadly Benghazi terror attack, U.S. officials tell CNN.