Monthly Archives: October 2012
by – Doug Hagmann
Most people know that we’ve been lied to about the attacks in Benghazi, but few realize the extent of those lies or the hidden secrets they cover. After all, the lie is different at every level. Thanks to a well placed source with extensive knowledge about the attack, the disturbing truth is slowly beginning to emerge and is lining up with information contained in my previous articles published here weeks ago (Here, Here and Here). The truth reveals the most serious situation in the world today as it involves the interests and destinies of us all.
A mosaic of lies
According to the U.S. government, Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed during a spontaneous protest at the consulate office in Benghazi by a frenzied crowd of Muslims outraged over an obscure internet video. Recently released “sensitive but not classified e-mails” from Stevens to the U.S. Department of State painted a picture of poor security for U.S. personnel and the embassy, which was obviously true but had little to do with the events of September 11, 2012. The failure to dispatch an extraction team or otherwise rescue the men during a firefight that lasted upwards of nine grueling and tortuous hours was not the result of any intelligence failure, but caused by our unwillingness to widen the conflict and expose the nature and scale of our true mission in Benghazi.
Based on information provided by my source and corroborated elsewhere, the official account by administration officials is a mosaic of lies that were necessary to cover the unpalatable truth of covert actions taking place in Libya, Syria, Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon. The primary objective of our covert actions was to secretly arm anti-Assad “rebels” in Syria by funneling arms from Libya to Syria via Turkey, with other destinations that included Jordan and Lebanon. Regarding the threat to Stevens and the other murdered Americans, the truth will reformat the persistent question posed to government officials, from UN Ambassador Susan Rice to White House Spokesman Jay Carney and others from “how could you not have known” to “how could you have done these things?”
First, it is important to understand that Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Dougherty and Tyrone Woods were not killed at a consulate office in Benghazi—as there is not such office there. They died at one of the largest CIA operations centers in the Middle East, which was located in Benghazi and served as the logistics headquarters for arms and weapons being shipped out of the post-Qaddafi Libya.
Although the U.S. government insisted that Stevens was involved in securing and destroying the numerous caches of arms and weapons once under the control of Qaddafi, the operation was more complex than that. The visual accounts of weapons being destroyed were indeed real, but those weapons were not operational. The working weapons were actually separated and transported to holding facilities for their eventual use in Syria. Russia was fully aware of this operation and warned the U.S. not to engage in the destabilization of Syria, as doing so would endanger their national security interests. Deposing Assad, as despotic as he might be, and replacing him with a Muslim Brotherhood-led regime would likely lead to unrestrained Islamic chaos across the region.
The Turkish warning
According to my source, Ambassador Stevens was in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 to meet with his Turkish counterpart, who reportedly warned Stevens that the operation was compromised. They met in person so that Stevens could be shown overhead satellite images, taken by the Russians, of nefarious activities taking place in Turkey. But just what were these nefarious activities?
It is reasonable to suspect that these activities were more dire than just your average “gun running” operation. Since the overthrow of Qaddafi, it is estimated that upwards of 40 million tons of weapons and arms were shipped out of Libya to Syria. But it was also known inside intelligence circles that Qaddafi possessed chemical weapons in addition to numerous surface-to-air missiles. Could it be that Russia obtained unmistakable surveillance footage of the anti-Assad “rebels” being shown how to load chemical payloads onto missiles inside Turkey near the border of Syria? Weapons, of course, that were shipped from Libya by the CIA in conjunction with various Muslim Brotherhood rebel groups. If so, such weapons could be used as a “false flag” type of operation—one that would be implemented to “set-up” Assad by making it appear that he was using these weapons on forces dedicated to his overthrow.
The blowback by the international community would be swift and punishing, and the entirety of the civilized world would be demanding his overthrow. NATO would then be used to expedite his ouster, and Russia’s moral position within the international community would be weakened. Was the meeting held to show Stevens that the operation was compromised and that they had to stop?
A Nation/State sponsored attack?
While the administration asserts that the attack in Benghazi was conducted by a group of rebels acting alone, the facts seem to indicate otherwise. The level of coordination was such that we did not deploy military assets, located just an hour or two away by air, to rescue Stevens and the others at the CIA operations center in their time of need. If, as the administration contends, that the attack was perpetuated by a group of frenzied rebels, our military could have easily handled them in short order. So why was there no rescue operation?
Perhaps the statements made yesterday by Leon Panetta, U.S. Secretary of Defense provides some insight if one analyzes the essence of those statements. Among other things, Panetta said that “…the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on…” Well, it has been confirmed we did know what was taking place on the ground in Benghazi, so exactly what did Panetta mean by this statement?
Against the backdrop of the official story, it makes little sense. If, however, one considers the alternative, that the attack was coordinated and was a nation/state sponsored attack, then it becomes clearer. Panetta and the highest levels of this administration likely knew exactly what we were doing, and knew that the operation was compromised. They knew, or had reason to believe, that the attack was being conducted at a nation/state level in response to our covert operation in Libya and arming the anti-Assad Syrian opposition.
Although Russia figures prominently here, Iran now comes into focus as Russia is not likely to directly engage U.S. forces. They must, however, protect their interests. Much like we were using anti-Assad forces to advance our objectives in Syria, Russia was using Iranian-backed forces to protect theirs. It appears that the attacks were conducted or facilitated by Iranian assets—perhaps as many as three teams of assets in Benghazi.
As the White House and other agencies monitored intelligence in real-time, they faced a dilemma. They knew that the nation/state sponsored attack teams were lying in wait for U.S. rescue forces to arrive, which is the reason the fight did not conclusively end sooner. They did not know exactly where all of the attack teams were, but knew they were present based on signal communication intercepts. Could they risk such exposure by deploying a rescue team to Benghazi, only to end up with another Black Hawk down type scenario? In addition to that scenario, the entire operation now becomes exposed for what it is. Take another look at Panetta’s statement in that context. Does it now make more sense? Bad PR in an election year, no?
As daylight approached with no response from the U.S. and no aid to the Americans under fire, the attack teams had to disperse into the cover of the remaining darkness, but not before their mission was accomplished. And sadly, it was.
From the day of attack in Benghazi, Iran has been engaged in a full spectrum attack on the U.S. and NATO across the board involving embassies, bombing and even cyber attacks. All of this is the fallout from the arms and weapons smuggling operation, which was far greater than understood by the Western media.
Russia has now moved their contingent of S-400 missiles into much of Syria in anticipation of NATO establishing an “air cap” over Syria. A ten-mile “buffer zone” along Syria’s border has been created for Syrian refugees, but it also acts as a catalyst for the encroachment into Syrian territory. It sets the stage for further advancement and erosion of Syrian land, incrementally, of course.
It is also of critical importance to note that last weekend, Russia completed large-scale exercises of their Strategic Nuclear Forces under the watchful command of President Vladimir Putin. These were the first such nuclear exercises conducted since the fall of the Soviet Union.
To those with discernment, it is obvious that we are at the precipice of World War III. Putin himself stated as much, noting that WW III will not start in Iran but Syria, his own “red line in the sand.”
Copyright © Douglas Hagmann
Douglas J. Hagmann and his son, Joe Hagmann host The Hagmann & Hagmann Report, a live Internet radio program broadcast each weeknight from 8:00-10:00 p.m. ET.
Douglas Hagmann, founder & director of the Northeast Intelligence Network, and a multi-state licensed private investigative agency. Doug began using his investigative skills and training to fight terrorism and increase public awareness through his website.
Doug can be reached at: email@example.com
- The hidden real truth about Benghazi (fromthetrenchesworldreport.com)
- BOMBSHELL: Obama Admin. Was Likely Running Arms To Islamic Jihadists Through Benghazi (5440fight.com)
- Why Did Obama Deny Military Help for Benghazi? (mb50.wordpress.com)
- Arms Flow to Syria May Be Behind Benghazi Cover-Up (papundits.wordpress.com)
- Benghazi and the Lethal Price of Arming Jihadists (frontpagemag.com)
- Chris Stevens’ Last Words (frontpagemag.com)
- Benghazi becoming major scandal for Obama (conservativelyspeaking.us)
- Americans Hung Out to Dry in Benghazi (americanclarion.com)
Submitted by may on October 28, 2012 – 12:44am
From the evidence thus far, it appears that the decisions to deny military help to the US Consulate in Benghazi and subsequently to the CIA safe house was made by President Obama.
The Obama Administration tired to shift the blame to the CIA for the lack of military support for the US Consulate and the CIA safe house. A CIA spokeswoman denied that requests for help had been turned down by the CIA, implying the decision was made by President Obama,
CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood, though, denied the claims that requests for support were turned down.
“We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi,” she said. “Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night-and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades.”
General David Petraeus, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, has made no comments on what happened in Benghazi. Petraeus has not appeared on any news broadcasts and has given no interview. Petraeus will not lie for Obama. Breitbart has reported that Petraeus has denied that the CIA was the agency denying help to those requesting it in Benghazi.
Central Intelligence Agency director David Petraeus has emphatically denied that he or anyone else at the CIA refused assistance to the former Navy SEALs who requested it three times as terrorists attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on the night of Sep. 11. The Weekly Standard and ABC News report that Petraeus’s denial effectively implicates President Barack Obama, since a refusal to assist “would have been a presidential decision.”
Earlier today, Denver local reporter Kyle Clarke of KUSA-TV did what the national media largely refuses to do, asking Obama directly whether the Americans in Benghazi were denied requests for aid. Obama dodged the question, but implied that he had known about the attacks as they were “happening.”
Emails released earlier this week indicated that the White House had been informed almost immediately that a terror group had taken responsibility for the attack in Benghazi, and Fox News reported this morning that the two former Navy SEALs, Ty Woods and Glen Doherty, had been refused in requests for assistance they had made from the CIA annex.
Jake Tapper quoted Petraeus this afternoon denying that the CIA was responsible for the refusal: “No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”
The Breitbart report continued,
As William Kristol of the Weekly Standard notes, that leaves only President Obama himself to blame:
So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.
It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations—did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?
Why would President Barack Obama deny military support to the US Consulate in Benghazi and subsequently deny support to the CIA safe house?
Did Obama want to conceal the fact the attack was conduced by al-Qaeda terrorists? Would this have interfered with Obama’s claim that al-Qaeda is vanishing since the killing of Osama bin Laden?
Was the Terrorist attack in Benghazi organized by Iran or Syria in retaliation for President Obama and Ambassador running guns into Syria and placing the weapons in the hands of Assad? Was Obama afraid of starting a war with Iran or even with Russia?
Did President Obama want Ambassador Stevens killed because Stevens knew too much? Were Stevens and Obama running guns to al-Qaeda in Syria much like Holder and Obama were running guns to drug cartels in Mexico with operation Fast and Furious? Did Obama think allowing al-Qaeda to assassinate Stevens would put the lid on the Syrian gun running operation before it could become a scandal just before the General Election?
Congress and other responsible investigators must ask these difficult questions. If President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and others are innocent, they need to be cleared of suspicion. I suspect the final answers regarding the involvement of President Barack Obama and others in the Obama Administration will shock our nation.
- Hmmmm: CIA David Petraeus says, “Obama is full of it” (thoughtsandrantings.com)
- CIA ‘s Petraeus Throws Obama Under the Bus (sgtreport.com)
- BREAKING: CIA Requested Help During Benghazi Battle, Were Denied Three Times (pjmedia.com)
- BREITBART by JOE POLLACK (Evidence Mounts Against Obama – JM) (sohereandnow.wordpress.com)
- Chris Stevens’ Last Words (frontpagemag.com)
- Petraeus v. Obama (nationalreview.com)
- Petraeus(CIA) Throws Obama Under the Bus (tarpon.wordpress.com)
This week the SubseaIQ team added 2 new projects and updated 15 projects. You can see all the updates made over any time period via the Project Update History search. The latest offshore field develoment news and activities are listed below for your convenience.
N. America – US GOM
Oct 26, 2012 – Noble Energy expects the Ensco 8501 (UDW semisub) to be available to drill the second Gunflint appraisal well in early 2013 after it finishes exploratory drilling at the Big Bend prospect in the US Gulf of Mexico. Gunflint, situated in Mississippi Canyon Block 948, was appraised and confirmed commercial earlier in the year and represents the company’s largest Gulf of Mexico discovery to-date. The discovery well intersected several reservoirs netting more than 550 feet of high-quality pay. Gunflint is believed to hold up to 500 Mmboe.
Project Details: Gunflint (Freedom)
Oct 24, 2012 – Karoon Gas Australia believes the Boreas discovery in permit WA-315-P could be commercial based on well test results. The company feels that future production wells drilled adjacent to Boreas-1 could flow in excess of 100 MMscf/d. Results from the well will be combined with data gathered from Kronos-1, the Poseidon wells and Poseidon 3D seismic to further characterize the size and structure of the Greater Poseidon Trend. The company’s assessment of contingent resources will be independently assessed upon completion of the drilling program.
Project Details: Poseidon
Europe – North Sea
Oct 26, 2012 – The Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy granted approval to Lundin Petroleum for the Plan of Development and Operation of the Boyla field in PL 340 offshore Norway. Estimated gross reserves are roughly 21Mmboe with gross peak production of 19,000 Boepd. Boyla will be developed via a subsea tie-back to the Alvheim FPSO. Technip was awarded the field development contract and will handle construction and installation of the subsea equipment.
Project Details: Alvheim
Oct 26, 2012 – Well 34/6-2S on the Garantiana prospect offshore Norway has been drilled to a total depth of 13,287 feet by the Borgland Dolphin (mid-water semisub). The well, located in Production License 554, penetrated good quality oil-bearing reservoir rock in the Cook formation. Further analysis is needed for an accurate resource estimate but initial flow rates of 4,000 barrels per day were achieved through a 28/24-inch choke. Pending available contracted rig days, the partners in the Total-operated license may elect to drill a sidetrack well to define the oil-water contact.
Project Details: Garantiana
Shell Takes Hess’ Spot at Beryl
Oct 25, 2012 – Royal Dutch Shell and Hess Corporation have reached an agreement whereby Shell will buy Hess’ stake in the Scottish Area Gas Evacuation Pipeline and the fields that comprise the Beryl Area. Beryl is operated by Apache and is made up of 12 producing fields on the UK continental shelf northeast of Aberdeen. Hess’ net daily production from the area through the first three quarters of 2012 was about 14,000 boepd. Shell plans to extend the production life of its new assets potentially by 20 years. The $525 million deal is expected to close during the first quarter of 2013, pending regulatory approval.
Oct 25, 2012 – Exploration of the Wintershall-operated Asha/Noor prospect in the Norwegian North Sea has commenced on board the Bredford Dolphin (mid-water semisub). Well 16/1-16 is being drilled in 370 feet of water on the western edge of the Utsira High area and is targeting four reservoirs assumed to be Upper Jurassic sandstones. In addition, the well has the potential to appraise the neighboring Ivar Aasen and Apollo discoveries. If the reservoirs are deemed commercially viable the prospect could be developed via the Grane Field processing facilities.
Project Details: Noor
Nexen Spuds Polecat Appraisal
Oct 24, 2012 – Atlantic Petroleum announced the commencement of appraisal drilling at the Polecat prospect in UK license P1100. Well 20/4a-11 is being drilled in 370 feet of water by the Transocean GSF Arctic III (mid-water semisub) in the vicinity of the Ettrick and Blackbird fields. The well is targeting Upper Jurassic reservoirs and is expected to take 50 days to reach total depth. Nexen and Atlantic Petroleum hold 80% and 20% stakes respectively while Nexen maintains operatorship of the license.
Oct 23, 2012 – JV partner Antrim Energy announced positive initial results from the Contender well 211/21-N94 in the UK North Sea. Drilling took place on the TAQA Bratani-operated North Cormorant platform and reached a total depth of 16,903 feet. Preliminary results suggest a net oil pay in excess of 60 feet was encountered in the Tarbert member of the Jurassic Brent sandstones. Ongoing testing has revealed greater than expected porosity and hydrocarbon saturation. If Contender is determined to be commercial, it will be developed from North Cormorant under the name Cormorant East.
Project Details: Falcon
Oct 23, 2012 – Shell received consent from the UK government to proceed with the development of the Fram field in the UK sector of the North Sea. The development, one of the largest to be approved in five years, is expected to contribute 35,000 Boepd to the country’s production with a field life of 20 to 30 years. Although Shell is the operator, JV partner Esso Exploration & Production UK is the major equity holder with a 68% interest. Fram was discovered in 1969 and is unrelated to the Norwegian field of the same name. The gas condensate field is located in blocks 29/3a and 29/8c in roughly 300 feet of water.
Project Details: Fram
Oct 22, 2012 – Sterling Resources announced a delay in production start-up at the Breagh field in the UK North Sea. Late design completion, rework of certain systems and late material deliveries combined to cause construction delays which have pushed the anticipated start-up date to the end of 1Q 2013. Breagh Phase 1 development costs have risen to $825 million which is 1.4 percent above initial estimates. Development drilling at the field has not been hampered by the construction delays. The first three wells will be flow-tested before the end of the year. A fourth well is expected to come on stream once field production is established.
Project Details: Breagh
Oct 23, 2012 – GeoGlobal Resources received disappointing results from the Sara-1 well offshore Israel. Approximately 321 feet of high quality reservoir sands were encountered but proved to be wet without commercial quantities of hydrocarbons. Logging runs provided evidence that gas had once migrated through the system. The Noble Homer Ferrington (DW semisub) drilled the well to a total vertical depth of 12,887 feet and is in the process of plugging and abandoning the well before being released. Data collected during the operation will be used to refine the geologic model of the area and to further evaluate other possible targets within the license.
Oct 23, 2012 – The partners in the Leviathan gas field offshore Israel are taking bids to add an international partner to the group to help distribute field development costs. Being offered is up to a 30% stake in the field. Sources indicate Australia’s Woodside Petroleum and Russia’s Gazprom are likely finalists in the bidding round. Leviathan holds an estimated 17 trillion cubic feet of gas and is expected to be brought into production in 2017. The bidding round is due to end in the coming month.
Project Details: Leviathan
Oct 22, 2012 – NSAI released an independent resource report covering the Adira Energy-owned Samuel License offshore Israel. The report indicates P50 estimates of 65.8 MMbbl of oil and 65.8 Bcf of gas in four structures within the license. “The initial well will target the Cretaceous section which is estimated to contain almost 38 million barrels of prospective oil equivalent,” CEO Jeffrey Walter said. Samuel comprises an area of 223 square miles in waters up to 330 feet deep.
Project Details: Samuel
Asia – SouthEast
Oct 25, 2012 – Salamander Energy’s Bualuang Bravo Platform construction project is on track to finish on time and within budget. The platform’s jacket has been fabricated and is en route to the Bualuang field where it will be positioned. Topside installation will begin shortly thereafter. Thai Nippon Steel was awarded the construction contract for the 16-slot platform in 1Q 2011. Through the Bravo platform, Salamander plans to double the amount of horizontal production wells currently in use and feels that production will increase from the current level of 11,500 bopd to 15,000 bopd in 2013. The Atwood Mako (400′ ILC) is scheduled to begin development drilling from the platform at the end of November.
Project Details: Bualuang
ROC Announces Successful Balai Cluster Appraisal
Oct 24, 2012 – Appraisal drilling activities at the Bentara-2 well in the Balai Cluster SFRSC have come to a stop upon reaching a total vertical depth of 9,038 feet. BC Petroleum was incorporated to manage the Balai Cluster Small Field Risk Service Contract and is comprised of ROC (48%), Dialog Group (32%) and Petronas (20%). Early results indicated and estimated net hydrocarbon pay in excess of 328 feet across a total interval of 2,132 feet. The well will now be cased and completed in preparation for well testing. Appraisal drilling is the first phase in pre-development of the license and is scheduled to take 18 months to execute. If pre-development is completed successfully the partners in BC Petroleum will submit a field development plan and work towards bringing the Balai Cluster into production.
S. America – Brazil
Oct 24, 2012 – Statoil, together with partner Sinochem, has completed drilling an appraisal well at the Peregrino South prospect offshore Brazil. Well 3-STAT-8-RJS intersected approximately 278 feet of high-quality oil-saturated sandstone reservoir in the Carapebus formation. Goals of the operation were to validate previous volume estimates and establish an optimal development plan. The joint venture will use the positive results from the appraisal to guide the Peregrino Phase II development.
Project Details: Peregrino
- Worldwide Field Development News Oct 13 – Oct 19, 2012 (mb50.wordpress.com)
- Worldwide Field Development News Oct 9 – Oct 15, 2012 (mb50.wordpress.com)
- Worldwide Field Development News Sep 22 – Sep 28, 2012 (mb50.wordpress.com)
- Worldwide Field Development News Sep 29 – Oct 5, 2012 (mb50.wordpress.com)