Is Obama’s Benghazi Investigator, Thomas Pickering, biased and unfit to head Investigation?

What the hell is going on? Is Benghazi part of a failed Obama public relations ploy to win the election?

Could it be that Obama’s “October surprise” was to announce that an agreement had been reached with Iran, that they would halt their nuclear ambitions much like the Kissinger “peace is at hand” announcement?

If so, and if Iran had any involvement on a nation-state level in Benghazi, wouldn’t it seem logical that the truth about the attacks needed to be managed without any such mention of Iran?

Who would be the best person to head such an investigation?

And if Iran was behind the pre-planned and sophisticated 9/11 murderous attacks in Benghazi, could it be that the July 31, 2012 mortar attack was a probe of that facility’s defenses in advance of a future attack? That would explain the curious disappearance of the 7 member Iranian “Red Crescent” team, and their equally mysterious reappearance, unharmed, 65 days later.

Barack Obama promised Americans that he is committed to investigate any intelligence and security failures in Libya. To this end, it was announced in the Federal Register on October 4, 2012, that Thomas Pickering would be the chairman of the U.S. State Department’s Accountability Review Board, a commission charged with investigating the deaths of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans on September 11, 2012, in Benghazi. But who is Thomas Pickering and why was he selected to head the investigation?

… Pickering appears to be a logical choice to select if one were to have an interest in controlling the public disclosure. Pickering, it appears, has quite a cozy history with Iran as extensively documented by Matthew Vadum in his October 24, 2012 report.   <Source>

This is not the only investigative journalist wondering about the actual role of Thomas Pickering. If Diana West’s assertions that Obama is in cahoots with known terrorists is literally true, might this serve as grounds for impeachment on the grounds of aiding and abetting an enemy of the United States in time of war? 

There is the implication that the cover-up will continue by the Obama’s selection of Thomas Pickering to head the investigation of the Benghazi 9/11 attack which killed Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans.

Obama in cahoots with known terrorists

But is Thomas Pickering, Obama's choice to lead the Benghazi investigation, the proper person to search for it? On first glance, Pickering, a retired top diplomat and State Department official, sets off conflict-of-interest alarms for helming an investigation that must focus closely on the State Department. On closer inspection, however, so many red flags pop up around Pickering that his selection becomes another Benghazi-gate scandal in itself.

Pickering is one of those Washington insiders whose public record is less a matter of what he's done than what he's been: U.S. ambassador to Russia, Israel, El Salvador, Jordan, India, Nigeria and the United Nations. What such postings may obscure, however, is that the man is a foreign policy establishment leftist. It's not just that

Pickering serves as chairman of the board of trustees of the International Crisis Group, a George Soros group that, for example, advocated engagement with the Shariah-supremacist Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Pickering has personally explored opening relations with Hamas; pushed peace talks with the Taliban; argued for getting rid of, or removing to the U.S., all tactical nuclear weapons in Europe (and moving Russia's to east of the Urals); and promoted bilateral talks with Iran without preconditions.

And speaking of Iran, Pickering sits on the boards of two pro-Tehran groups, the American Iranian Council and the National Iranian American Council.

The Iranian connections are additionally disturbing since one Benghazi scenario to be explored is whether Iran was involved, possibly in retribution for U.S. support of anti-Assad forces (including jihadists) in Syria. Read more here

Not only do Pickering’s association disqualify him from investigating the Benghazi attack, but they shed some additional light on Barack Obama’s apparent attempt to keep the truth from the American people. This is definitely a “scary” story because we allegedly have the President of the United States, a man who refuses to reveal routine background information, aiding and abetting known terrorists and killers of American military personnel. 

Could Eric Holder have short-circuited the FBI’s investigation in Benghazi? Especially since “sensitive documents” continued to be found on the property by journalists after the FBI allegedly investigated the “crime scene?”

More than six weeks after the shocking assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi — and nearly a month after an FBI team arrived to collect evidence about the attack – the battle-scarred, fire-damaged compound where Ambassador Chris Stevens and another Foreign Service officer lost their lives on Sept. 11 still holds sensitive documents and other relics of that traumatic final day, including drafts of two letters worrying that the compound was under “troubling” surveillance and complaining that the Libyan government failed to fulfill requests for additional security.

When we visited on Oct. 26 to prepare a story for Dubai based Al Aan TV, we found not only Stevens’s personal copy of the Aug. 6 New Yorker, lying on remnants of the bed in the safe room where Stevens spent his final hours, but several ash-strewn documents beneath rubble in the looted Tactical Operations Center, one of the four main buildings of the partially destroyed compound. Some of the documents — such as an email from Stevens to his political officer in Benghazi and a flight itinerary sent to Sean Smith, a U.S. diplomat slain in the attack — are clearly marked as State Department correspondence. Others are unsigned printouts of messages to local and national Libyan authorities. The two unsigned draft letters are both dated Sept. 11 and express strong fears about the security situation at the compound on what would turn out to be a tragic day. They also indicate that Stevens and his team had officially requested additional security at the Benghazi compound for his visit — and that they apparently did not feel it was being provided. <Source>

Bottom line …

I am rapidly losing faith in the Executive Branch of the American government, the very institution that promised to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. We know that the President of the United States, United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta have openly lied to the American people. The reasons are unclear and troubling.

If it was a matter of a failed foreign policy and gun-walking heavy military arms through Turkey to the Syrian rebels – possibly known associates of al Qaeda – that might be explainable as a foreign policy misadventure or miscalculation. It the intent was to arm the Muslim Brotherhood in order to dominate the region to achieve some parity with Israel and to protect Iran from a unilateral Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear sites, that is a far more troubling matter. If it was a matter of doing a deal with Iran for political purposes, it appears that this cover-up exceeds the parameters of Watergate and the President needs to be investigated and impeached if necessary.

It almost seems that the President of the United States, in spite of his TelePrompTered words, appears to favor the Islamists over Israel, and possible over the unexceptional United States. Is it possible, that the Muslims have managed to place one of their own into a position of power at the very highest levels by allowing the American left to believe he is one of their own? While I know that Obama-sympathizer Eric Holder technically controls the FBI, one would suppose that some intelligence agency knows the truth about his school records, passport and travel records. Or did they, like the American mainstream media, simply buy the “historic” package and allow an unvetted President Obama to assume office?

It remains for the President of the United States to provide a full and complete explanation – preferably prior to the election.

In the mean time, I strongly suggest that Barack Hussein Obama may not be a fit Commander-in-Chief and should be denied the Presidency of the United States.

-- steve

Reference Links …

Obama’s October surprise - exposed by Benghazi?

Surprise! Attack Investigator Biased Toward Islam – Diana West Exposes Attitude Of Obama-Picked Probe Chief, Thomas Pickering

Benghazi Investigator Slams America and ‘Islamophobes’

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS