When the end justifies the means you will always have situations like Benghazi.

(Wikipedia) Modus Operandi is a Latin phrase, approximately translated as "method of operation". The term is used to describe someone's habits or manner of working, their method of operating or functioning. In English, it is often shortened to M.O.

"The expression is often used in police work when discussing a crime and addressing the methods employed by the perpetrators. It is also used in criminal profiling, where it can help in finding clues to the offender's psychology. It largely consists of examining the actions used by the individual(s) to execute the crime, prevent its detection and/or facilitate escape."

That about sums up everything about Barack Hussein Obama that you need to know and what his Modus Operandi has been. Especially the criminal part. Obama's one-time Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel, added a twist to Barry's M.O. by telling him to, "Never let a crisis go to waste." Add this to the favorite thought of every Marxist that "The end justifies the means" and you have the makings for a very sinister group of conspirators willing and able to do anything, anywhere to get the results they want. Anything! 

So now we know that Hillary Clinton's State Department knew that the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, Libya was a terrorist attack within two hours after it happened. Previously, we learned that Ambassador Stevens had asked for additional security for the embassy due to unrest in the area and his request was denied by the State Dept. And we know that instead of placing Americans on guard at the embassy, the State Dept. had contracted out the security to a local gang of Islamic dissidents. And those who are knowledgeable about the laws of Islam know that it is a high crime for any Muslim to kill another Muslim in order to protect a non-Muslim. So how were those Muslim security guards supposed to protect the American staff at the embassy if their religion forbid them from killing another Muslim? 

And of course, we know that in the days after the attack both Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Clinton and the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations (along with the entire leftist horde of journalists in the news media) all were trying to blame the attack on the embassy as a result of a spontaneous demonstration of outraged Muslims who had been gravely insulted by an amateur video posted on YouTube which none of them probably even watched. And now we know that that attempt has failed.

So what was the reason behind the attack and what was the explanation for all of the failures to prevent it? If you consider the logic behind "The end justifies the means" often used by Marxists then maybe someone was trying to accomplish something. Or at least take a crisis and turn it to an advantage to accomplish an insidious deed.

When the initial attempt to blame the attack was being aimed at the anti-Islam video many liberals were chirping in that perhaps we should modify our Freedom of Speech rights so as to not be allowed to insult any religion. This is similar to what liberals do whenever a shooting takes place and people are killed. Think Fast & Furious. Calls are quickly made for more Gun Control. You've all heard the argument before about how many rights would you be willing to give up to gain a little more security.

The influence of the numerous Muslim organizations in America today is incredibly disproportionate to their population numbers. Yet we recently have learned that since Barack Hussein Obama, famous for saying "We must respect Islam", has occupied the White House, there has been a growing number of Muslims who have backgrounds connected to extremist organization, visiting the White House. As reported on Pamela Geller's Atlas Shrugs last Monday, Jihadists enjoy unfettered access to the White House  Steve Emerson and John Rossomando from IPT News released a report on October 21, 2012 that proved this.

A year-long investigation by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) has found that scores of known radical Islamists made hundreds of visits to the Obama White House, meeting with top administration officials.

Court documents and other records have identified many of these visitors as belonging to groups serving as fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and other Islamic militant organizations.

The IPT made the discovery combing through millions of White House visitor log entries. IPT compared the visitors' names with lists of known radical Islamists.

One of the primary goals of Islamic extremists is to force or cajole Western governments into adopting Islamic Sharia Law and make all criticism against Islam to become a crime. This is based on Islam's Blasphemy Law which bans anything that insults Muslims. Any non-Muslim quoting a violent passage from the Qur'an or a text that describes some unpleasant act by the prophet Mohammad mentioned in one of the Hadiths or even writing about nearly 20,000 Islamic-inspired Jihad attacks since 9-11 and Muslims, who love to be called followers of The Religion of Peace, instantly explode into homicidal rage. (at least they do in countries where they comprise more than 10% of the population)  But there is something useful in modifying our Freedom of Speech rights that may appeal to anyone prone to totalitarian dictatorship. By blaming criticism as a form of hate speech you can also criminalize any act that tells the truth about what a wanna-be dictator does. You end up banning the opposition. Just as when guns are banned because of some extreme act of violence, which is another favorite rule enacted by every dictator. 

So lets call it for what it was, the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, Libya was a complete set-up and it was allowed to happen because the powers that be wanted to use the crisis as an excuse to restrict our right to Free Speech. But they failed when the facts were uncovered.

My name is Nelson Abdullah and I am Oldironsides.