Two months ago, Rand Paul was being lambasted by most Americans for his question to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regarding a load of weapons being shipped from Benghazi to Turkey where Syrian rebels could safely pick them up and use them. I followed up immediately with a piece attempting to explain the significance of the question and why it was pertinent to accurately tell the story of what happened to four Americans at a CIA compound in Benghazi back in 2012. To summarize:
1. Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was killed in Benghazi, is known to have had his final meeting of the day just an hour before the attack. That meeting was with government officials from Turkey.
2. Libya had large stocks of SA-7 missiles that are no longer accounted for.
3. Syrian rebels acquired large amounts of SA-7 weapons shortly after the Benghazi attacks.
I have to admit, I have a hard time thinking that there was no connection here. It seems to be pretty obvious. What that story did not implicitly tell you was that the Syrian rebels are Al-Qaeda members and those weapons from Libya were the same weapons used in Syria by the rebels. Which begs a very obvious question from my astute readers: Why would Al-Qaeda rebels attack a Benghazi compound (the Western media narrative) when the people in the compound are trying to get weapons to aid their cause? In short, they wouldn't.
The Wake Up Call's favorite reporter, Ben Swann, has been tackling this series of stories for some time. The day after the Benghazi attacks, Ben asked President Obama why the U.S. is supporting Al-Qaeda in Syria, yet fighting them globally? The president stated that "we are committed to providing non-lethal assistance" to the rebels which has been the public stance from the beginning. The New York Times reported that weapons were in fact being funneled across the Turkish border via the CIA. So what gives? Obviously the president isn't being honest about the activity. Is it to protect CIA operatives? Maybe. More likely it is to protect the U.S. government from blow back, the kind that happened on September 11, 2012 in Benghazi.
By and large, however, the U.S. television media has refused to tell this story. They only report that in Syria there is a civil war where good people are trying to overthrow a bad man whose only claim to power is his control of the military which he uses against the good people of Syria.
Once again, Ben Swann has come to the aid of the truth. A Syrian national named Emilio Ibrahim reached out to Ben's YouTube channel, Full Disclosure, hoping to shed some light on the coverage that the "uprising" has gotten in the West. I want you, dear reader, to click this link and watch the interview. Ben did the work and he deserves the visits.
What you will find is disturbing in more ways than one. The interview serves as corroboration for what many of us have been trying to say for a long time - the U.S. government lies to you at every turn. You are being willingly deceived with state-approved propaganda. If a journalist attempts to fight back against the media corporations and their backers, they get fired, as Amber Lyon was fired by CNN.
This should serve as the ultimate wake up call for many of you. I hope you can clear your minds of what you see and have been taught for years by the talking heads, so that you can indeed begin to be enlightened by the truth. For if you choose to continue to turn a blind eye, then you are a willing participant and worthy of the blow back that comes.
Here is a video in Damascus showing huge support for President Assad: