Hillary Clinton Acts Guilty in Ambassador Stevens Death

There is no question that  American Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens was murdered in Benghazi.  The question I have been dealing with in two previous posts is whether or not Stevens was placed in Benghazi so he would be killed much like Israel's King David ordered his general to have Uriah the Hittite assigned to a place in a battle where his death was virtually certain.

I don't expect to  prove who was responsible if Americans assigned Stevens to Benghazi to be killed.  Such proof might require the investigative skills of a real life Sherlock Holmes. 

Ian Fleming once observed:  "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy  action."  Prior to the 2008 presidential primaries two known homosexuals who were acquainted with Barack Obama died violent deaths. In November, 2011, Larry Sinclair who wrote a book claiming to have had an affair with Obama, was killed by a hit and run driver.   Chris Stevens who was murdered by terrorists at Benghazi was also a known homosexual.

[Correction:  Larry Sinclair is alive.   A rumor about his death was posted on the Free Republic possibly as part of a pattern of intimidation reported by Kevin Dujan who had scheduled a radio interview with Larry Sinclair to discuss Sinclair's allegations about Obama being homosexual and using drugs.]

Stevens wouldn't be the first high American official whose assassination was approved by someone in the United States government.  Military historian Robert Wilcox in his book "Target Patton"  claims that in December, 1945, OSS head "Wild Bill" Donovan ordered OSS marksman Douglas Bazata to kill Gen. George Patton because Patton was threatening to expose what Patton considered allied collusion with the Soviets that cost American lives.  The World War II era OSS was the predecessor of the CIA.   

Some believe Ambassador Stevens might have been  killed because he was about to blow the whistle on a questionable "gun running" scheme to send old  Libyan government weapons to Syrian "Contras" [or whatever Syrian rebels are called] or some other group.  A problem with this explanation is that an attack on Stevens in Benghazi would draw attention to whatever the CIA was doing there.   The fact the CIA facility was located so close to the consulate could indicate that the "intelligence" officials involved weren't very intelligent.   If the CIA had an operation going in Libya, locating it in the same city as a diplomatic facility would severely hamper keeping the operation secret.  The attack on the CIA compound indicates the terrorists suspected what the CIA was up to.   Their abuse of Stevens' body indicates they knew he was homosexual.

Those who don't understand government would likely say if the government wanted Stevens dead, President Barack Obama would have ordered the killing.  However, unless the  situation was similar to the murder of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Obama probably wasn't involved.  Archbishop Thomas Becket was killed in 1170 by followers of King Henry II of England who believed the King wanted him killed.   President Harry Truman probably did not know about the killing of General Patton. 

Then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton could  have been responsible, but I doubt she's intelligent enough to come up with such a plot.  It would be more likely that she went along with a plan developed. by someone else.    Her behavior before and after the incident implies she is guilty of something.   Her use of a private email service implies she was doing something improper, if not illegal.  Her attempt to avoid responsibility for the incident by inventing a easily disproved story about a riot caused by an anti-Muslim video implies she was covering up something, particularly considering that she came up with the story so soon after the incident.

Clinton's use of a private email server could have allowed terrorists to monitor her email.  If so they would have known the United States wouldn't protect its diplomats in Benghazi.  They might have also learned Stevens was homosexual which could have provided an added incentive to want to kill him.

If the murder of Stevens was part of a pattern that included the murders of Obama's homosexual acquaintances, the person in charge  was probably someone associated with Obama's financial backers.   They might have assigned someone to "protect their investment" by eliminating those who could pose a threat to Obama's election chances by raising the homosexual issue.  

Before I started this series I thought it was more likely that Stevens' death  was the result of incompetence.  Now, I think it is more likely someone wanted him to be killed.   I believe the test Sen. Saw Erwin used for President Richard Nixon and Watergate applies to Secretary of State Clinton and Benghazi.  If she knew Stevens was likely to be killed she is a crook.  If she didn't she is incompetent.