It's far more profound than that. How about deliberately shipping weapons to terrorist organizations in Syria? Hopefully, Gowdy goes for broke in this investigation since the stand-down from Africom had more nefarious implications.
The two former Navy Seals were also actually on the CIA payroll, not the State Dpt. payroll (Hillary Clinton eventually admitted this to congress.) And
this was on Breitbart:
“The first question he asked – why was Ambassador Stevens there?” she continued. “This was not a diplomatic outpost. This was a CIA outpost. And Ambassador Stevens was known as an assertive ambassador who didn’t pay enough attention to his own personal safety. He didn't like what was going on in that consulate. They were detaining people. They were interrogating people. And he was going there to basically confront what was going on. This was a CIA operation, which is why there was so much confusion in how to respond in the hours immediately after.
Also it
sounds like there was miscommunication between the military and CIA in Benghazi, and unfortunately U.S. Special Operations guys killed one or more CIA Assets without realizing they were CIA Assets. This pissed off the other CIA Assets involved in the arms smuggling operation and whatever else they had going on there which some believe is one of the causes the Embassy was attacked. Because the CIA did not communicate and tell Special Operations exactly who their CIA Assets were, that's why David Petraeus was fired. Everybody at the CIA knew about the affair between Paula Broadwell and David Petraeus for years-- that was not news. But the U.S. Government used that affair to fire Petraeus rather than level with the American people about the real reasons Petraeus was fired (and of course the corporate media, as usual, was nothing more than a spokesman for the U.S. Government). Glenn Greenwald also had an interesting take on this: the U.S. Government got all those emails during the years of the affair between Broadwell and Petraeus: how did they get those emails? Well, they asked the NSA. So that proves yet again that the NSA is keeping all of our personal communications. And it also proves that the NSA will release these communications for "other" reasons than terrorism-- as in the case of the U.S. Government wanting the written proof to fire a government employee on an issue that had nothing to do with him being involved in "terrorism".
Also Benghazi was at the root of so many other conflicts the U.S. is meddling in. Erdogan and the Turkish Government paid the U.S. Government to smuggle the weapons in Gaddafi's Arsenal to Turkey where there was a base to train rebels to overthrow Assad. Many of the rebels who fought in Libya are the same ones fighting in Syria. Immediately following the attack on the Benghazi embassy the weapons smuggling ceased. This pissed off Erdogan who had already paid the U.S. Government since Erdogan wanted to see the overthrow of Bashur Assad in Syria. So it was Erdogan who coordinated the False Flag Chemical Weapons attack of Sarin Gas that killed over 1,000 Syrian Civilians -- Erdogan wanted it to appear that Assad had crossed Obama's "red line" in order for the United States to implement a bombing raid on Syria. Israeli intelligence was caught actually lying to U.S. intelligence because the Israeli's handed over their signal's intelligence to the U.S. which they claimed ""proved"" that the sarin gas attacks were caused by someone in the command structure of Assad's army.
Much later U.S. intelligence confirmed that the sarin gas attack was indeed done by the Turks and that the Israelis were not honest.
Russia under Putin of course is the one who put a halt to Obama's bombing the hell out of Syria when he vetoed the U.N. resolution calling for military force on Syria and negotiated the deal where Assad gave all his chemical weapons over to the U.N. (China abstained but quietly agreed with Russia). Ban Ki Moon and Lakhdar Brahimi stated that if the U.S. went ahead and bombed Syria without U.N. approval that it would be completely against international law (not that this has ever stopped the U.S. from doing this before). And considering that after the fact U.S. intelligence found that it was Erdogan and the Turks who coordinated the chemical weapons attack that crossed Obama's red line and not Assad, Putin really did save Obama a diplomatic nightmare.
But at the time between Putin stopping war in Syria and Iran, the warmongers were getting pretty pissed at Putin and there's speculation that that is why we are in Ukraine (to punish Putin). (Of course the deals between the Ukraine government and Chevron, Cargil, Monsanto, etc., gave the politicians plenty of incentive to attack Ukraine as well.) Also, the base to train rebels moved from Turkey to Jordan and the U.S. CIA is currently openly funding on the CIA Payroll, training and arming Syrian rebels with U.S.-made weapons. The CIA works with Prince Bandar from Saudi Arabia on this base: this is the guy who helped the CIA with the arms smuggling to the Contras in Nicaragua in the 1980s as well as the arms that went to Osama Bin Ladin's Mujahadeen in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Anyway, the training in Jordan of these rebels is what is apparently destabilizing Iraq because some of these trained fighters are apparently going into Iraq instead of Syria.
The CIA's arms smuggling via the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi and the overthrow of Gaddafi also caused the de-stabilization of Mali when many Touregs who were formerly in Gaddafi's army went home after his overthrow.
---------------------
In any case, the real issue is: Why are U.S. Embassies
all around the world being used as CIA Outposts? It is a common joke in Latin America that the only reason the U.S. Government has not been overthrown is because there is not a U.S. Embassy here.
The second issue is why is the CIA and USAID perpetually responsible for fomenting violence and overthrowing Democratically Elected Governments around the world and installing far right-wing military juntas and despots that torture their own people? 95% of U.S. wars seem to be fought via the CIA using proxies where the CIA or our military trains these juntas rather than fight themselves in wars. And we, the U.S. taxpayers, pay for the overthrow of democratically elected leaders and the criminal torture and deaths of innocents that result from these actions. Why is this not considered "war" which would require authorization from Congress? How is our "proxy wars" exempt from this constitutional requirement?
