Thursday, July 04, 2013

Morsi, The Blind Sheikh, Benghazi and the Case for Impeaching Obama administration officials


From Barrack Now:


By Walid Shoebat, Ben Barrack and Keith Davies

A Libyan intelligence document has been produced that directly implicates Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood president Mohammed Mursi in the attacks on American installations in Benghazi on 9/11/12. 

Those who attempt to discredit this document run into trouble when it is coupled with real-time video we uncovered on 9/13/12. In that video, gunmen at the scene of the attack can be heard declaring that they were sent by Mursi.

After weeks of attempting to push the narrative that a video was responsible, the Obama administration ultimately had to concede that the attacks in Benghazi were terrorist in nature. A few months after 9/11/12, the top lawyer for the Pentagon stated that the war on terror should be waged by "law enforcement and intelligence agencies".

Based on the Obama administration's standard, the Benghazi attacks should be treated as a crimeinstead of as an act of war. Therefore, let us bring forth the evidence, which implicates the leader of a nation state (Egypt) in the attack and warrants a grand jury (House of Representatives) investigation to decide if administration officials should be indicted (impeached).

Since we're deciding who to indict, we must look at evidence of involvement in the attack. Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood President - Mohammed Mursi - is a good place to start. Our first two exhibits are both damning but when taken together, may just constitute a 'smoking gun'. EXHIBIT A is a video shot from a cell phone at the scene of the attacks. 

In this video, gunmen are seen running toward the camera, toward other gunmen. At one point - in Arabic which we have confirmed - one approaching gunman says, "Don’t Shoot us! We were sent by Mursi!"

Even though the video is in Arabic, you can discern the word "Mursi".



Libyan Intelligence document (EXHIBIT B) has now been brought forward by credible Arabic translator Raymond Ibrahim. This document discusses the confessions of six members of an Egyptian Ansar al-Sharia cell who were arrested and found to be involved in the Benghazi attacks. Ibrahim reported the following about this document: 
It discusses the preliminary findings of the investigation, specifically concerning an “Egyptian cell” which was involved in the consulate attack. “Based on confessions derived from some of those arrested at the scene” six people, “all of them Egyptians” from the jihad group Ansar al-Sharia (“Supporters of Islamic Law), were arrested.
According to the report, during interrogations, these Egyptian jihadi cell members “confessed to very serious and important information concerning the financial sources of the group and the planners of the event and the storming and burning of the U.S. consulate in Benghazi…. And among the more prominent figures whose names were mentioned by cell members during confessions were: Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi...
Libyan Intelligence Document translated by Ibrahim
Libyan Intelligence Document translated by Ibrahim (EXHIBIT B)
That the attack was planned and involved foreigners corroborates what Libyan President Mohamed Yousef el-Magariaf told CBS News' Bob Scheiffer on Face the Nation on Sunday, September 16th (EXHIBIT C):
BOB SCHIEFFER: And you believe that this was the work of al Qaeda and you believe that it was led by foreigners. Is that-- is that what you are telling us?
MOHAMED YOUSEF EL-MAGARIAF: It was planned-- definitely, it was planned by foreigners, by people who-- who entered the country a few months ago, and they were planning this criminal act since their-- since their arrival.
Relative to Mursi's alleged involvement, El-Magariaf provided only circumstantial evidence by identifying attackers as being "foreigners" but in retrospect, the Libyan president's claims that day are corroborated by the Libyan Intelligence document and the real-time video. It is for this reason that we request he be required to testify in front of the grand jury.

Also on September 16, 2012, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice appeared on five Sunday talk shows and asserted the attack was the result of a spontaneous demonstration in response to a video. Here are quotes from Rice's appearance during on ABC This Week, during which she said the following (EXHIBIT D): 
“What happened this week in Cairo, in Benghazi, in many other parts of the region was a result, a direct result of a heinous and offensive video that was widely disseminated, that the U.S. Government had nothing to do with, which we have made clear is reprehensible and disgusting.”
At a minimum, Rice was directing attention away from Mursi's involvement with this demonstrably false statement. A short time later, she went as far as directly defending Mursi: 
"President Obama picked up the phone and talked to President Mursi in Egypt and as soon as he did that, the security provided to our personnel and our embassies dramatically increased... President Mursi has been out repeatedly and said that he condemns this violence. He's called off... and his people have called off any further demonstrations and have made very clear, that this has to stop."


Rice attempted to leave viewers with two impressions, one demonstrably false and the other belied by hard evidence: 
  1. A video was responsible
  2. Mursi was not involved
At this point, we'd like to introduce an exchange between House Oversight Committee member, Rep. Trey Gowdy and Gregory Hicks, a whistleblower and the top-ranking State Department official in Libya once Ambassador Stevens was murdered (EXHIBIT E). This entire exchange is being introduced as evidence but we ask you, the Grand Jury, to pay particularly close attention at the 1:45 mark, when Gowdy introduces the name Beth Jones and reads from an email she sent to several State Department officials on September 12th, one day after the attack. In her email, Jones wrote the following: 
"I spoke to the Libyan Ambassador... When he said his government suspected that former Gadhafi regime elements carried out the attacks, I told him that the group that conducted the attacks - Ansar al-Sharia - is affiliated with Islamic terrorists."
On September 12th, Jones corroborated the claims made in the Libyan Intelligence document (EXHIBIT B) that an Egyptian Ansar al-Sharia cell was involved in the attacks, which corroborates the real-time video (EXHIBIT A). Yet, four days later - after this reality must have been further demonstrated, Rice's statements only served to cover-up the involvement of Mursi and Ansar al-Sharia by extension.

Moreover, Hicks charged that by contradicting the Libyan president, Rice seriously chilled the willingness of the Libyan government to allow FBI Investigators access to what the Obama administration viewed as a crime scene. As such, the crime scene was contaminated and Rice's lies may constitute an obstruction of justice charge.



The first indications that the Obama administration would decide to point to the video as being responsible for the Benghazi attacks appeared to come soon after it was learned that Sean Smith had been killed. 

There is cause to believe that news of Smith's death may have precipitated the decision to point to the video. A Press Release (EXHIBIT F) bearing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's name was released some time prior to 10:42pm EST that night. This is known because anAP article (EXHIBIT G) published at that time made reference to Clinton's statement as well as to Smith's death:

EXHIBIT F
EXHIBIT F

In the days after September 11th, President Mursi seemed to adopt the narrative of the Obama administration relative to the video being responsible for causing them. He did so, ironically enough, at the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) in New York City on September 25th (EXHIBIT H).



EXHIBITS I and J are two video excerpts from President Obama's speech at the United Nations on September 25th, the same day that Mursi spoke at the CGI. During the speech, Obama echoes what Rice said about his defense of Mursi. Yet, Obama defended him publicly two weeks later, even after intelligence about Mursi's role had been readily available:



Obama again identifies the video as being responsible for the attack:



Ever since assuming the office of President on June 30, 2012, Mursi has been extremely clearabout his strong desire to have the "Blind Sheikh" released. The Washington Post reported that Mursi "assumed office with a pledge to press the United States for Abdel Rahman's release" and that al-Qaeda's number one - Ayman al-Zawahiri - echoed the sentiment (EXHIBIT K).

Fox News reported on July 3, 2012, that Mursi "proclaimed to hundreds of thousands of supporters in Tahir Square... that he will gain the release of Rahman" (EXHIBIT L).

In an interview between CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Mursi from January 7th of this year, Mursi doubled down on his support for the release of Rahman (the "Blind Sheikh") while making an appeal for sympathy for the mass murderer (EXHIBIT M):


While admitting his desire for the release of the "Blind Sheikh", Mursi said that if release is not possible, increased visitation and freedom should be granted to Rahman. A letter attributed to Rahman appeared in an al-Qaeda's Inspire magazine (EXHIBIT N). In an article published by The Hill, Rep. Peter King (R-NY) pointed to this letter in which the convicted terrorist is credited with ordering a bombing in western Egypt in 1997 that killed dozens of people. This demonstrated that the "Blind Sheikh" still has deadly tentacles.

Four-star Admiral James Lyons (Ret.) who on November 14, 2012, appeared on Fox Business Network with Lou Dobbs (EXHIBIT O). During that interview, Lyons said he believed the only reason that made any sense relative to Ambassador Stevens being in Benghazi on 9/11 was a kidnapping operation in which Stevens could be traded for the "Blind Sheikh":



Consider the itinerary for Ambassador Stevens, who arrived in Benghazi on 9/10/12 and was scheduled to depart on 9/14/12 (EXHIBIT P). That the State Department's top official in Libya would be sent to Benghazi one day before the anniversary of 9/11 is indeed vexing but that he would be sent to a location that was woefully unprotected and had been attacked with an I.E.D. that blew a large hole in the perimeter wall is beyond troubling. There had been several terrorist attacks on western installations as well prior to September 11th as chronicled in a letter (EXHIBIT Q) from House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa to President Barack Obama.

Amazingly, on September 28, 2012, after evidence implicating Mursi in the attacks in Benghazi had become available, the Obama administration announced that it would be providing Mursi's government with $450 Million, despite protestations from Congress. A New York Times article(EXHIBIT R) outlined the details of the aid package:
The Obama administration notified Congress on Friday that it would provide Egypt’s new government an emergency cash infusion of $450 million, but the aid immediately encountered resistance from a prominent lawmaker wary of foreign aid and Egypt’s new course under the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood.
An act of war, which probable cause suggests, Mursi was involved in perpetrating against the United States in Benghazi, is not usually met with a multi-million dollar aid package.

However, if there were a deal between Obama administration officials and Mursi administration officials, to stage a kidnapping operation in which Stevens was captured and subsequently exchanged for the "Blind Sheikh", which side would stand to lose more if the truth were to come out?

While still president-elect, Mursi attempted to satiate his base by pledging to have the "Blind Sheikh" freed; it was practically part of his platform. If there had been a deal that were made public, Mursi's stock would most assuredly rise among his base. Conversely, if such a truth were to be made known, Obama would be finished.

This would grant Mursi significant leverage. Again, we take the opportunity to underscore that the Obama administration had to have known about the high probability of Mursi's involvement in the attacks as it was cutting a check for $450 Million on September 28th, barely more than two weeks later.

GO READ THE WHOLE THING.

22 comments:

Nicoenarg said...

Yup I can clearly hear "Mursi". That's basically what the news segment was focusing on. The Arabic spoken on the news sounds Egyptian. I wonder if its Egyptian news or whether Libyans speak similarly.

Now, the fall of Morsi leaves open the possibility that the news of this conspiracy hatched by Obama and Morsi will come out. No wonder Obama administration doesn't support this move by the military.

Anonymous said...

The Benghazi narrative revealed a consistent 'tell' with the curious and persistent disclaimers . . .ff 47 sec. in Susan Rice video above and listen as she states:

'was a direct result of a heinous and offensive video that was widely diseminated 'that the US government had nothing to do with'


Two days after the attack on Benghazi consulate, she was sure the video was widely diseminated . . .yet the video had only a couple hundred views (at best) at the time of the attack.
But the biggest 'tell' in this fictional narrative is revealed with the claim 'that the US government had nothing to do with' the video.

Hillary also made a very similar statement of denial on several occasions (ff 26 sec here.
Who would have immediately thought the US government would produce such an amateurish film? Why would this administration think others would accuse them of creating and diseminating the film unless they really were involved with it's production?

Thank you for posting this terrific synopsis. Would be great to see a modern day Woodward &/or Berstein bring this to a wide audience and strike now, while the foundation of the Muslim Brotherhood is crumbling at it's source.

Anonymous said...

One question that I have yet to see answered . . .does anyone know what the Arabic graffiti on the Benghazi consulate site walls said? Shoebat never answered the question when asked on his site. I wonder if Ray Ibrahim noted it anywhere.

Charles Martel said...

This is the most shameful event in American history. All these people need to be impeached asap, except Obama of course, because otherwise we would end up with uncle Biden. Obama should keep his presidential position without any power, and let the grown ups govern.

Can anybody believe this is the USA?

Pastorius said...

NICO,
WHAT DOES THE GRAFFITI SAY?

Nicoenarg said...

What graffiti are you guys referring to? Can you post the link to the image, I'll see if I can understand what it says.

Ciccio said...

The good news is that Morsi is now under arrest. When he finds out Obama is only to happy to have him the large crowd already under Obama's bus he will squeal like a pig being slaughtered.

Pastorius said...

So basically WE GOT LERNER AND MORSI IN ONE DAY.

AWESOME!

Anonymous said...

Links for images of graffiti on Benghazi consulate structures after 9/11/12 attack:

http://tinyurl.com/pv96zk3

http://tinyurl.com/qczdnaa

Thanks Nico/Pastorius

Anonymous said...

http://tinyurl.com/pemqhqe

this blog has one photo posted with the comment it says allahu Akbar, among other things.

I chuckle as I type these comments on my iPad and it auto corrects to capitalize only Akbar in the above sentence, not allahu.

Anonymous said...

another Hillary video with same preemtive declaration of innocense

"I also want to take a moment to address the video(S)circulating on the internet that has led to these protests in a number of countries.

"LET ME STATE VERY CLEARLY - AND I HOPE IT IS OBVIOUS - THAT THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS VIDEO.


Videos? There was more than one circulating?

She HOPES it is OBVIOUS?

This administration's reaction to the Benghazi attack can be characterized as that of being caught with the mindset of a preschool toddler caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

The more I review the White House/State Department response to the Benghazi attack, the more obvious it becomes they had a hand in it - along with Morsi.

Nicoenarg said...

The first image says (on the right): allah-u-akbar. (on the left): La ilaha il-allah, muhammad-u-rasul-allah. The BS of Islam that says: "There is no god but satan (allah) and mohammed the perpetually anally raped dog is his prophet" (I may have translated that a bit differently...but meh).

Huh...most of the images in the second link are the same as the first one. One of the ones that isn't (second one from the left when you load the page) says some names that I haven't heard of like: Malik (or Melek) Jemal al Bashar (before people start assuming a connection with Syria and Bashir al Assad, the name is different and so is the family name).

Melek does not seem to be part of the name, Melek means King. This graffiti may actually be some of the names of those that took part in the attack? I'm not sure.

Another name written is Melek Chas (with the Ch pronounced as the ch in Chabad in Hebrew). Its also written as "Khas".

Nicoenarg said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nicoenarg said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nicoenarg said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Pastorius said...

There is no god but satan (allah) and mohammed the perpetually anally raped dog is his prophet" (I may have translated that a bit differently...but meh).'


THAT SOUNDS LIKE AN ACCURATE TRANSLATION TO ME.

Nicoenarg said...

The last one has me baffled. Terrible handwriting. I can't really understand much other than allah-u-akbar in the middle (read from top to bottom). On the right of allah-u-akbar says something like: 'Azwash? Hamza (a name?) and to the left of it says: Wahda? al Sifr, which means one to zero.

Nicoenarg said...

(Okay seriously Google stop taking my comments down!)

Pasto,

Hehe, I thought so. My Arabic must be getting better.

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Nico.

Is there anything that would link with:
Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman (Arabic: عمر عبد الرحمن‎, ‘Umar ‘Abd ar-Raḥman, commonly known in the United States as "The Blind Sheikh"? Abdel-Rahman was accused of being the leader of Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya. (king?)
In a speech to supporters in Cairo's Tahrir Square on 30 June 2012, Mohamed Morsi briefly mentioned that he would work to free Omar Abdel-Rahman, convicted in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York City, along with the countless other Egyptians who were arrested during the revolution link.

On 18 September 2012, conservative opinion website Breitbart.com reported that Egyptian President Morsi's government is in current negotiations with the US State Department about the transfer of Omar Abdel-Rahman from US custody to Egyptian custody.[21]

During the In Aménas hostage crisis a Mauritanian news organization reported that the kidnappers had offered to swap American hostages in Algeria for the release of Omar Abdel-Rahman and Aafia Siddiqui link.


These unrelated reports demonstrate a pattern of thought within this administration and the characters thus far implicated in the evidence.

Nicoenarg said...

I don't see anything saying Abdul-Rahman but if this was a plan to kidnap Stevens to save the blind bastard then I would assume the jihadis who knew about it wouldn't spray-paint their whole plan and announce it to the world.

The graffiti does not seem to be done in order to send a message to anyone.

Pastorius said...

Nico,
Thank you very much for helping out here.

Nicoenarg said...

Anytime Pasto :D