by Pamela Williams
I have done several reports on the work in George Webb’s videos, which involves missing CEO of the Clinton Foundation Eric Braverman, his missing partner Neil Brown, and missing Arms Dealer Marc Turi. All three men are connected to the Clinton Foundation and the work of Hillary Clinton. It is a complex story of the inner workings of the Clinton Foundation with far reaching tentacles reaching and exploiting troubled regions of the world. They penetrate these areas in the guise of a charity organization, but in fact, they seek to topple leaders of wealth in oil rich countries such as Libya. They create wars to sell arms to both sides involved in those wars. Hillary Clinton is a woman who will do anything for wealth and the power, producing that wealth from what she perceives as political gain She is not a woman to be understood except as a war monger, an opportunist, and a Saul Alinsky groupie who also, by all intents and purposes, is a Satanist. I make this assumption, as how could she be anything else? How can she be understood as anything else, just as Alinsky was? Alinsky was a self proclaimed Satanist, and so admired by the young Clinton she did her college thesis on the man. This is how I have come to perceive the evil that flourishes around the Clinton Foundation.
We all know that Bill Clinton is a womanizer, who is good friends with a convicted child molester, Jeffrey Epstein. He has flown on this man’s sex orgy plane to his private island 26 times where the criminal knowingly keeps underage girls and boys for wealthy and influential people to prey on. The American people just seem to accept this as a matter of fact, when, in fact, we should not accept it! Our minds have been filled with so much Clinton trash we just consider it to be “normal behavior” now, BUT IT IS NOT…IT IS CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR!
I am posting George Webb’s latest video now, and I hope you will watch it before you read any further. My attempt here is to match the video with articles and actual WIKILEAKS emails between Hillary Clinton and associates.
I do not know Webb personally, but I have been following his work for quite some time. He has a brilliant mind, and he must have some background experience into the inner workings of world politics. As John Podesta said in one of his infamous emails, talking about Eric Braverman being a mole inside the Clinton Foundation, Eric had told NBC NEWS to “follow the money.” George Webb goes on to say, “follow the money, arms, and oil.”
When Ambassador Chris Stephens was placed in a newly established consulate in Benghazi, he was placed there to deal arms being transferred to an army that Hillary’s friend Sid Blumenthal created for Hillary. She planned to overthrow Muammar el-Qaddafi…not because he was mistreating his people or for humanitarian purposes…but because of his billions in gold, oil, and ultimately provide an area to be taken over by the army that Sid and Hill built. Later that army would morph into ISIS.
Sid Blumenthal was Hillary’s confidant and probably her closest friend after Huma Abedin. Sid was totally controlled by Clinton to the point he did a lot of her dirty work in Libya. When the Benghazi Committee was formed with Trey Gowdy at the helm he subpoenaed Blumenthal for questioning. Gowdy knew the truth about Blumenthal’s participation in the Benghazi tragedy and questioned him of such, but Blumenthal denied it all. I found the WIKILEAK’S email related to this from Sid to Hillary on this matter. wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/2038 From:email@example.com To: undisclosed-recipients: BCC: firstname.lastname@example.orgDate: 2015-10-21 19:16 Subject: The truth…
FROM ABOVE ARTICLE DENYING BLUMENTHAL’S ROLE IN HILLARY CLINTON’S BENGHAZI TRAGEDY. GOWDY WAS TRYING TO GET AT THE TRUTH.
In other words, there was nothing unusual about someone like Blumenthal directing his analysis and information to Hillary Clinton. Had the secretary instructed Blumenthal to stop providing potentially valuable intelligence, it would have been not only likely unprecedented but also bordering on incompetence. The only point in subpoenaing Blumenthal to testify was for the Republicans to traffic in Benghazi-related conspiracy theories, including one explicitly stated on Sunday by a member of the Benghazi committee, Representative Mike Pompeo of Kansas. In an appearance on Meet the Press, he said Clinton had “relied on Mr. Blumenthal for most of her intelligence” on Libya. Gowdy, in a letter he made public on October 8, made the same statement Think about that for a moment. Either Pompeo and Gowdy were being completely disingenuous, or irrationally believe that Clinton (who was cleared to review any classified intelligence developed by the State Department, the CIA and other agencies throughout government) instead decided to make decisions based primarily on information from a man who had never been to Libya.
ON TO EMAIL wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/19118From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 10:03 PM To: Subject: Fw: WSJ: Hillary and Libya From: Caitlin Klevorick [mailto B6 Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 09:51 PM To: Reines, Philippe I; Sullivan, Jacob J; Mills, Cheryl D; Rich Verma-personal < B6 Subject: WSJ: Hillary and Libya Hillary and Libya November 16, 2012
I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS IS INVOLVED IN THE CLINTON FOUNDATION, BUT IF YOU WATCHED WEBB’S VIDEO YOU KNEW THAT. HERE IS AN ARTICLE MILLS HAD SENT HILLARY: wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/19118
From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 10:03 PM To: Subject: Fw: WSJ: Hillary and Libya From: Caitlin Klevorick [mailto B6 Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 09:51 PM To: Reines, Philippe I; Sullivan, Jacob J; Mills, Cheryl D; Rich Verma-personal < B6 Subject: WSJ: Hillary and Libya Hillary and Libya November 16, 2012
David Petraeus told Congress Friday in closed hearings that the CIA believed from the start that the September 11 attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi were by terrorists. That leaves one VIP who’s still missing from Congressional scrutiny: Hillary Clinton. GOP Congressman Peter King said Mr. Petraeus’s testimony differed from what the former CIA director told Congress immediately after the attacks. Mr. King also said Mr. Petraeus said that the CIA’s original talking points on the attacks were edited. The altered version became the basis for U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s misleading and now infamous comments blaming the attacks on a YouTube video. Both that discrepancy and the issue of the altered talking points need further digging, especially if Ms. Rice is nominated to be the next Secretary of State.
This abdication is the backdrop to what happened on September 11. The large CIA outpost in Benghazi was supposed to monitor jihadists and work with State to round up thousands of mobile surface-to-air missiles in Libya. Yet it turns out that it’s hard to fight terrorists on the ground with drones from remote bases. Without a functioning government or broader U.S. aid, a small Islamist militia was able to target foreign diplomats and eventually lay siege to the U.S. compound. The CIA closed its entire Benghazi shop that very morning—an abject retreat. For weeks, the Administration has tried to shift blame for Benghazi to the "intelligence community.” Mr. Petraeus’s fall makes him an easy scapegoat, even as Mrs. Clinton takes a valedictory lap at State and sets her sights on a 2016 Presidential run. But U.S. Libya policy has been her handiwork, and with the exception of the fall of Gadhafi it is a notable failure. Mrs. Clinton is also a main architect of U.S. policy in Syria, which continues to descend into disorder that may engulf the region. She shouldn’t get a free pass from Congress.
wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/16657From: Cheryl Mills [mailto: B6 Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 08:2,7 PM To: H Subject: Fwd: Benghazi was obama’s 3 am call cdm Begin forwarded message: From: Caitlin Klevorick B6 Date: October 1, 2012, 8:10:03 PM EDT To: Cheryl Mills B6 Subject: Benghazi was obama’s 3 am call
Libya was a failure of policy and worldview, not intelligence. Why won’t the Libya story go away? Why can’t the memory of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and his staff be consigned to the same sad-and-sealed file of Americans killed abroad in dangerous line of duty? How has an episode that seemed at first to have been mishandled by the Romney camp become an emblem of a feckless and deluded foreign policy? The story-switching and stonewalling haven’t helped. But let’s start a little earlier. The hour is 5 p.m., Sept. 11, Washington time, and the scene is an Oval Office meeting among President °barna, the secretary of defense, the national security adviser and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi has been under assault for roughly 90 minutes. Some 30 U.S. citizens are at mortal risk. The whereabouts of Ambassador Stevens are unknown. What is uppermost on the minds of the president and his advisers? The safety of Americans, no doubt. So what are they prepared to do about it? Here is The Wall Street Journal’s account of the meeting: "There was no serious consideration at that hour of intervention with military force, officials said. Doing so without Libya’s permission could represent a violation of sovereignty and UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04841 Doc No. C05739633 STATE DEPT. – PRODUCED TO HOUSE SELECT BENGHAZI COMM. UNCLASSIFIED STATE DEPT. – PRODUCED TO HOUSE SELECT BENGHAZI COMM. U.S. Department of State SUBJECT TO AGREEMENT ON SENSITIVE INFORMATION & REDACTIONS. NO FOIA WAIVER. Case No. F-2015-04841 Doc No. C05739633 Date: 05/13/2015 inflame the situation, they said. Instead, the State Department reached out to the Libyan government to get reinforcements to the scene.” So it did. Yet the attack was far from over. After leaving the principal U.S. compound, the Americans retreated to a second, supposedly secret facility, which soon came under deadly mortar fire. Time to call in the troops? "Some officials said the U.S. could also have sent aircraft to the scene as a ‘show of force’ to scare off the attackers,” the Journal reported, noting that there’s a U.S. air base just 450 miles away in Sicily. "State Department officials dismissed the suggestions as unrealistic. ‘They would not have gotten there in two hours, four hours or six hours.” The U.S. security detail only left Washington at 8 a.m. on Sept. 12, more than 10 hours after the attacks began. A commercial jet liner can fly from D.C. to Benghazi in about the same time. All this is noted with the benefit of hindsight, and the administration deserves to be judged accordingly. But it also deserves to be judged in light of what it knew prior to the attack, including an attack on the mission in June and heightened threat warnings throughout the summer. So how did the administration do on that count? "That the local security did so well back in June probably gave us a false sense of security,” an unnamed American official who has served in Libya told the New York Times last week. The logic here is akin to supposing that because the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center failed to bring down the towers, nobody need have been concerned thereafter. But let’s still make allowances for the kind of bureaucratic ineptitude that knows neither administration nor political party. The more serious question is why the administration alighted on the idea that the attack wasn’t a terrorist act at all. Also, what did the White House think it had to gain by adopting the jihadist narrative that a supposedly inflammatory video clip was at the root of the trouble? Nobody can say. All the administration will acknowledge is that it has "revised [its] initial assessment to reflect new information that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack.” That’s from James Clapper, the director of national intelligence. It suggests that our intelligence agencies are either much dumber than previously supposed (always a strong possibility) or much more politicized (equally plausible). No doubt the administration would now like to shift blame to Mr. Clapper. But what happened in Benghazi was not a failure of intelligence. It was a failure of policy, stemming from a flawed worldview and the political needs of an election season.
From: Sidney Blumenthal To: Hillary Clinton Date: 2012-11-15 02:57 Subject: H: WHOLE LOT OF THINGS. SID
Point graduate. abcn.ws/UHjDqE ICRAUTHAMMER’S CONSPIRACY THEORY. ABC’s Sarah Parnass reports: [A] growing [A]ber of conservative commentators contend that the resignation of former CIA Director David Petraeus is more than simple amends made for a personal wrong. Charles Krauthammer, the Fox News and Washington Post commentator, believes the Petraeus’ sex scandal is linked to a closed briefing that he gave two days after the attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, in Benghazi, Libya. he; Krauthammer said on Fox News Tuesday that ties he sees between what Petraeus’ told the Congress in September and his fear for his future at the CIA make his affair with biographer Paula Broadwell important to the public. abcn.ws/UrnPue
THIS EMAIL NEEDS TO BE READ IN ITS ENTIRETY. IT REVEALS THE PANIC INSIDE THE HILLARY CAMP AS EMAILS ARE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC. IT ALSO REVEALS THAT CRITICAL EMAILS AROUND THE TIME WHEN CHRIS STEPHENS WAS KILLED ARE MISSING..
THIS EMAIL NEEDS TO BE READ IN ITS ENTIRETY. IT REVEALS THE PANIC INSIDE THE HILLARY CAMP AS EMAILS ARE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC. IT ALSO REVEALS THAT CRITICAL EMAILS AROUND THE TIME WHEN CHRIS STEPHENS WAS KILLED ARE MISSING.. wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/44710
*Among the emails the Select Committee finds highlight the existence of>> significant investigative questions:*>>>> · September 24, 2012–“Compiled protest and Benghazi Statements.” A>> document that reinforces issues relating to characterization of the motives>> for the attacks. For example, Jake Sullivan noted, “You never said>> spontaneous or characterized the motives. In fact you were careful in your>> first statement to say we were assessing motive and method. The way you>> treated the video in the Libya context was to say that some sought>> to *justify* the attack on that basis.*” *>>>> · August 24, 2012 — “H: Intel on new Libya president. Sid.” In this>> document two and a half weeks before the attacks, Jake Sullivan writes to>> the Secretary, “Some warning signs,” in response to the deteriorating>> security situation in Benghazi, which forced the Red Cross to suspend>> activities, and reinforces questions about what was done in response to>> these warnings.>>>> · April 4, 2012–“Secretary Clinton’s Leadership on Libya.” This>> document characterizes Secretary Clinton’s ownership of U.S. policy in>> Libya.>>>> · April 8, 2011–“UK game playing; new rebel strategists; Egypt moves>> in. Sid” In this document, Secretary Clinton responded to a Blumenthal memo>> with, “Fyi. The idea of using private security experts to arm the>> opposition should be considered.”>>>>>>>> *There are several instances of State personnel notifying the Secretary>> about security concerns and issues:*>>>> · April 10, 2011 – Forwarded email about deteriorating security>>>> · April 22, 2011 – Request for continuous coverage in Benghazi,>> “security permitting”>>>> · April 24, 2011 – Forwarded email about hotels being targeted>>>> · June 10, 2011 – Email including information about credible threat>> info against hotel and that personnel are evacuating to alternate locations>>>> · August 21, 2011 – Email regarding concerns about Islamist militias>>>> · January 9, 2012 – Email stating that disarming and reintegrating of>> militias isn’t going as well as they had hoped>>>> · February 24, 2012 – Email stating that militia rivalries are dangerous>>>> · August 24, 2012 – Email stating that there are “some warning signs”>>>>>>>> *The Committee also has an interest in understanding the inexplicable>> gaps in the Secretary’s emails during key times of her involvement in>> Libyan policy, including:*>>>>>>>> June 10-August 8, 2011–Time period where Secretary Clinton was heavily>> involved in Libya policy>>>>>>>> September 14-October 21 2011–Dates of Secretary Clinton’s trip to>> Libya, when the now-famous picture of Clinton on her blackberry was taken>>>>>>>> October 21, 2011-January 5, 2012–Time period when the State Department>> was extending the Benghazi mission for another year>>>>>>>> April 27- July 4 2012–Time period of increased security during which an>> IED was thrown at the compound blasting a hole through the wall and during>> which the British ambassador was attacked>>>>>>>>>>>>
NOW I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS A FEW ARTICLES I FEEL PARALLEL VERY MUCH WITH GEORGE WEBB’S VIDEO:
Refugee Crisis & Syria War Fueled By Competing Gas Pipelines
Don’t let anyone fool you: Sectarian strife in Syria has been engineered to provide cover for a war for access to oil and gas, and the power and money that come along with it.
The Arabic newspaper Al-Akhbar cites information according to which there is a plan approved by the U.S. government to create a new pipeline for transporting gas from Qatar to Europe involving Turkey and Israel. The capacity of such a pipeline is not mentioned, but considering the resources of the Persian Gulf and Eastern Mediterranean region, it could exceed that of both the Islamic Pipeline and Nabucco, directly challenging Russia’s South Stream. The main developer of this project is Frederick Hoff, who is «in charge of gas issues in the Levant» and a member of the U.S. «Syrian Crisis Committee». This new pipeline is to begin in Qatar, cross Saudi territory and then the territory of Jordan, thus bypassing Shiite Iraq, and reach Syria. Near Homs the pipeline is to branch in three directions: to Latakia, Tripoli in northern Lebanon, and Turkey. Homs, where there are also hydrocarbon reserves, is the «project’s main crossroads», and it is not surprising that it is in the vicinity of this city and its «key», Al-Qusayr, that the fiercest fighting is taking place. Here the fate of Syria is being decided. The parts of Syrian territory where detachments of rebels are operating with the support of the U.S., Qatar and Turkey, that is, the north, Homs and the environs of Damascus, coincide with the route that the pipeline is to follow to Turkey and Tripoli, Lebanon. A comparison of a map of armed hostilities and a map of the Qatar pipeline route indicates a link between armed activities and the desire to control these Syrian territories. Qatar’s allies are trying to accomplish three goals: «to break Russia’s gas monopoly in Europe; to free Turkey from its dependence on Iranian gas; and to give Israel the chance to export its gas to Europe by land at less cost». (4) As Asia Times analyst Pepe Escobar indicated, the Emir of Qatar apparently made a deal with the «Muslim Brotherhood» according to which it will support their international expansion in exchange for a pact of peace within Qatar. A «Muslim Brotherhood» regime in Jordan and in Syria, supported by Qatar, would abruptly change the entire geopolitical world gas market – decidedly in favor of Qatar and to the detriment of Russia, Syria, Iran and Iraq. It would also be a crushing blow to China. (5)The war against Syria is aimed at pushing this project through, as well as at the breakdown of the agreement between Tehran, Baghdad and Damascus. Its implementation has been halted several times due to military action, but in February 2013 Iraq declared its readiness to sign a framework agreement which would enable the construction of the pipeline. (6) It is worth noting that after this, more and more new groups of Iraqi Shiites have risen up in support of Asad; as The Washington Post admits, they have «no little battle experience» in confronting Americans in their country. Along with fighters from Lebanon’s Hezbollah, they make an ever more formidable force. (7) The stakes in the «elimination game» started in Syria by the West over the gas pipeline continue to grow. The end of the European Union’s embargo on supplying weapons to the Syrian opposition, which according to the BBC the majority of EU member countries were against (8) (democracy, where are you?), might not be able to help the rebels.
As for civilization and justice, when profit is at stake, sentiment doesn’t matter. The main thing is not to play the wrong card in this unfair game that smells of blood and gas.
Early in the Libyan conflict Secretary of State Clinton formally accused Gaddafi and his army of using mass rape as a tool of war. Though numerous international organizations, like Amnesty International, quickly debunked these claims, the charges were uncritically echoed by Western politicians and major media.
It seemed no matter how bizarre the conspiracy theory, as long as it painted Gaddafi and his supporters as monsters, and so long as it served the cause of prolonged military action in Libya, it was deemed credible by network news.
Two foremost examples are referenced in the latest batch of emails: the sensational claim that Gaddafi issued Viagra to his troops for mass rape, and the claim that bodies were “staged” by the Libyan government at NATO bombing sites to give the appearance of the Western coalition bombing civilians.
In a late March 2011 email, Blumenthal confesses to Hillary that,
I communicated more than a week ago on this story—Qaddafi placing bodies to create PR stunts about supposed civilian casualties as a result of Allied bombing—though underlining it was a rumor. But now, as you know, Robert gates gives credence to it. (See story below.)
Sources now say, again rumor (that is, this information comes from the rebel side and is unconfirmed independently by Western intelligence), that Qaddafi has adopted a rape policy and has even distributed Viagra to troops. The incident at the Tripoli press conference involving a woman claiming to be raped is likely to be part of a much larger outrage. Will seek further confirmation.
Not only did Defense Secretary Robert Gates promote his bizarre “staged bodies” theory on CBS News’ “Face The Nation,” but the even stranger Viagra rape fiction made international headlines as U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice made a formal charge against Libya in front of the UN Security Council.
What this new email confirms is that not only was the State Department aware of the spurious nature of what Blumenthal calls “rumors” originating solely with the rebels, but did nothing to stop false information from rising to top officials who then gave them “credence.”
It appears, furthermore, that the Viagra mass rape hoax likely originated with Sidney Blumenthal himself.
In conclusion the questions remains: Where are Eric Braverman, Neil Brown, and Marc Turi?
1…Braverman worked in Haiti for the Clinton Foundation, and he discovered that his husband, Neil Brown, was involved in the oil part of the Clinton Foundation. Further John Podesta said he was the leak inside the Foundation. Someone went to the news media and told them :to follow the money. Is Braverman in FBI witness protection? Did he disappear to avoid the things he discovered? Or is he no longer alive…like DNC staffer Seth Rich?
2. Neil Brown had been around the block as he was involved in the oil and pipeline part of the equation. Henry Kissinger was a type of mentor for Brown, and I read that Brown was being groomed for politics. Did he love Braverman so much that he ran away with him, or did he do the unthinkable and is laying low for the time being?
3. It does not look good for arms dealer, Marc Turi, who participated with Hillary and Obama in a arms deal that went bad for Turi in an Operation called Zero Footprint. Turi was made the fall guy, and he lost everything….his good name, his business, and his family. He went to FOX NEWS and told his story in an interview. One of the last things he said was I have more to share for another time. I REALLY BELIEVE HE WILL NOT HAVE THAT CHANCE. You do not fool with Hillary Clinton and stay alive to tell it.