Replies

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2945403/posts

State Dep’t suspected in April that Libyan guards at Benghazi consulate had tried to attack it
Hot Air ^ | 8:01 pm on October 15, 2012 | Allahpundit

Posted on Tuesday, October 16, 2012 1:09:04 AM by Ernest_at_the_Beach

Time for your daily reminder that State didn’t merely stick Chris Stevens with “average” security despite him living and working in one of the jihadi-est places on earth. The security they provided him was actively, inexplicably, inexcusably bad. And before you read any further, let me remind you that the ominous chat-room message posted by Sean Smith the day he died about a Libyan guard taking photos of the compound still hasn’t been addressed by anyone in the government that I’ve seen. Did Stevens’s security break down to the point that his killers actually had someone on the inside?

More red flags from Reuters:

State Department officials suspected that two Libyan guards hired by its own security contractor were behind an April incident in which a homemade bomb was hurled over the wall of the special mission in Benghazi, according to official emails obtained by Reuters…

The April attack illustrated concerns among some U.S. officials in Libya that hiring local residents for embassy guard duties could in itself raise security issues.

The emails identified one of the suspects in that incident as a former employee of Blue Mountain Group who had been fired four days earlier for vandalism, and said the other was still working for the company. Both were unarmed guards who performed routine security tasks, such as screening visitors.

Both suspects were ultimately released after being interrogated by the local “police,” a.k.a. the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, which was partly responsible for providing security for the consulate and whose members were last seen hiding on the roof during the attack because they weren’t ready for it. No word on whether either of them was still working for Blue Mountain on 9/11, but that brings us to another unanswered question. Why did State hire Blue Mountain, an inexperienced firm, in the first place?

Other firms in the security industry expressed surprise that Blue Mountain had won a large, high profile contract from the US government. One industry executive said the level of service Blue Mountain provided did not appear adequate to the risks presented by a lawless city.

“We have visited the consulate in Benghazi a number of times and have an excellent relationship with the Americans. Our assessment was the unarmed Libyan guards were extremely poor calibre,” said one security source. “The Libyan Ministry of Interior are generally not happy with Blue Mountain and had them on their close observation/target list.”

The New York Times last week reported that major security firms with a track record of guarding US premises elsewhere had made approaches to undertake work in Libya but were rebuffed.

“We went in to make a pitch, and nothing happened,” a security firm official told the newspaper.

Blue Mountain had six employees on the scene, five Libyans and one British supervisor recruited from “the celebrity bodyguard circuit.” Security was sufficiently weak that BM’s local affiliate, Blue Mountain Libya, complained to its parent company this past summer that the resources they were being given weren’t enough. State was asked to intervene in the dispute between the two — but chose to do nothing. So it came to be that the U.S. ambassador ended up on 9/11 at a consulate that was vulnerable even according to its own security detail, and which State had had ample opportunity to fortify. Meanwhile, on the same day, the U.S. embassy in Barbados enjoyed protection from a detail of Marines. “Smart power,” 2012.

Just as O’s interest in an “easy” intervention in Libya made a difficult intervention in Syria more difficult, State’s decision to half-ass security for the Benghazi consulate has created a new, bigger security headache for the White House in Libya. Namely, how hard do they hit the local jihadis in reprisal? The Libyan government doesn’t want to approve an attack lest it be seen as a U.S. stooge at a moment when it’s trying to build legitimacy, and the U.S. doesn’t want to raise the profile of a group like Ansar al-Sharia by making it the Great Satan’s new enemy number one. There is a compromise solution, but of course it’s not ready yet. If only State had thought of this before letting a smile be Chris Steven’s umbrella against the mujahedeen.

“Blue Mountain Libya, complained to its parent company this past summer that the resources they were being given weren’t enough. State was asked to intervene in the dispute between the two — but chose to do nothing. So it came to be that the U.S. ambassador ended up on 9/11 at a consulate that was vulnerable even according to its own security detail, and which State had had ample opportunity to fortify. Meanwhile, on the same day, the U.S. embassy in Barbados enjoyed protection from a detail of Marines. “Smart power,” 2012.”

Brotherhood Not Extremist, Intel Leaders Say

February 16, 2011

Director of National Intelligence JAMES CLAPPER emphasized the heterogeneous nature of the Brotherhood, saying its ideology and approach varies from country to country and describing a generational gap between old-line conservatives and younger members more willing to participate in secular political systems.

“This is not a monolithic organization,” CIA Director LEON PANETTA told the Senate Intelligence Committee. It has lawyers and professionals among its ranks, so while “it is clear that within the Muslim Brotherhood there are extremist elements,” it’s difficult to label the organization as a whole.

In that same House Intelligence Committee hearing, FBI Director ROBERT MUELLER was less forgiving. “Obviously, elements of the Muslim Brotherhood here and overseas have supported terrorism,” he said.
http://www.investigativeproject.org/2600/brotherhood-not-extremist-intel-leaders-say

The Muslim Brotherhood’s American Defenders

That these front groups, including the unindicted terror funding co-conspirators, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), play a key role in shaping the Obama administration’s agenda is beyond dispute. Senior administration officials including Mogahed have close ties to these groups. There is an ample body of evidence that suggests that the administration’s decision to side with the hostile Muslim Brotherhood against its allies owes to a significant degree to the influence these Muslim Brotherhood front groups and their operatives wield in the Obama administration.

To take just one example, last October the Obama administration agreed to purge training materials used by US intelligence and law enforcement agencies and eliminate all materials that contained references to Islam that US Muslim groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood had claimed were offensive.

The administration has also FIRED counterterrorism trainers and lecturers employed by US security agencies and defense academies that taught their pupils about the doctrines of jihadist Islam.

The administration also APPOINTED representatives of Muslim Brotherhood-aligned US Muslim groups to oversee the approval of training materials about Islam for US federal agencies.

Minutes earlier, Clapper acknowledged that the Brotherhood “probably is supportive” of weapons smuggling to Hamas terrorists in Gaza. He could not say what the Muslim Brotherhood would do regarding Egypt’s 32-year-old peace treaty with Israel.

Clapper used part of his opening remarks to clarify comments he made about the Brotherhood before a House committee hearing last week. In response to a question at that hearing, he called the Brotherhood “a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence.”

Clapper’s comments triggered disbelief among many in Washington last week, with Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., saying the administration either didn’t know much about the Brotherhood “or they are apologizing for them, which is inappropriate for those in charge of protecting the American people. Let’s be clear – the Muslim Brotherhood is NOT secular.”

In that same House Intelligence Committee hearing, FBI Director Robert Mueller was less forgiving. “Obviously, elements of the Muslim Brotherhood here and overseas have supported terrorism,” he said.

Clapper acknowledged using a “less than precise turn of phrase,” and said the Brotherhood is not secular, but in Egypt works within a largely secular political system. Its support, he said, is based on grass roots outreach and social services such as health clinics. It “likely will be a part of the political process in Egypt,” he said.

A Brotherhood representative is on an eight-member committee charged with recommending changes to Egypt’s suspended constitution by the end of next week. The existing constitution bars religious groups from forming political parties, but the Brotherhood’s presence on the committee, along with its stated intention to form a party to run candidates for parliament, indicate that limitation is not likely to endure.

As we reported last week, Article 2 of the Brotherhood’s bylaws call for it “to establish Allah’s law in the land by achieving the spiritual goals of Islam and the true religion.” That includes “the need to work on establishing the Islamic State, which seeks to effectively implement the provisions of Islam and its teachings.”

General Guide Muhammad Badi emphasized that point in a sermon given last September, saying the Quran should be the law of Egypt and that Muslims are duty-bound to bring that about....
http://townhall.com/columnists/carolineglick/2012/07/28/the_muslim_brotherhoods_american_defenders/page/full/

Washington’s war in Yemen Backfires:

http://www.thenation.com/article/166265/washingtons-war-yemen-backfires#

Video obtained from al-Qaeda-linked militants shows the Ansar al-Sharia group in Yemen parading weapons and ammunition obtained after an attack on the town of Zinjbar on Sunday (March 4). The assault killed 110 people and led to the capture of at least 50 government soldiers:
http://video.answers.com/yemen-militants-show-off-stolen-weapons-517298897#

The Muslim Brotherhood are working and advising from inside the Obama Administration according to Michelle Bachmann. The trust they have given the MB can be demonstrated by the verbal response, and policies and procedures employed by those who are supposed to protect us.

Leon Panetta, James Clapper, (Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Brennan..see link above) have similar views of the Muslim Brotherhood while Robert Mueller is in agreement with Michelle Bachmann as he bluntly states the MB support terrorism. It doesn’t take a genius to understand why the FBI were delayed in getting to the scene - trumped up “visa problem” issues.

It was clear that Ms Lamb was following her boss’ policies and procedures outlined by the State Department. She stated they replaced marines with trained local “brigades” to guard the US Mission. If she/they were comfortable insodoing why did she/they want to hide the Brigades proper name? She mentioned the 17 February Martyrs Brigade as...17Feb or 17Feb Brigade...omitting their proper name, the 17 February Martyrs Brigade. Why omit the word Martyr? (the same was done at the government conference with the MSM - read the transcript), the NY Times hence the rest of the media continue to omit that important word. But reports have shown that Al Sharia works hand and hand with Feb 17 Martyrs Brigade - the brigade in charge of guarding the Consul.

Lamb also said at the hearing that these trained locals who replaced the marines were used because it had a pattern of success which begs the question where has their policies succeeded? An example - Yemen - the CSU (trained and armed by the state dept) ran when Al Sharia attacked their base leaving the terrorists to seize anti-air missiles, modern weaponry, trucks...see video above. It resulted in 110 killed and 50 taken hostage.

What is the vetting criteria used when hiring locals for Security?

Who oversees the policy to ensure it’s a working policy and they do see failures what is the back-up plan?

What is their measure for success?

The seizing of modern sophisticated weapons, tanks, trucks etc., from Z in Tehran by Al Sharia have demonstrated not only a massive failure on our side, but would give anyone pause that the Jihadi Salafists now have the weaponry to attack wherever and whenever they wanted. That alone should have been enough

The successes I’ve seen are on the side of the Muslim Brotherhood. Makes one wonder who Obama et al are really working for...