Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Showing posts with label Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Did John Brennan's actions play a role in Benghazi attacks?

When coupled with the shocking claim by John Guandolo, that Barack Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, converted to Islam while a station chief in Saudi Arabia in the 1990's, some of the details released from a new book written by a retired Green Beret and a Navy SEAL may take on added significance. Among other things in the book, Brennan's orders while operating from the White House are identified as the motivation for the 9/11 attacks in Benghazi.

Brennan is Obama's nominee to replace David Petraeus as CIA Director.

But first, take a look at some other relevant information taken from the book, starting with power players at the CIA who wanted Petraeus gone as CIA Director.

Via The Daily Mail:
Media reports indicate that the FBI began investigating Petraeus' affair with Broadwell after Tampa socialite Jill Kelley, a friend of Petraeus and his wife Holly, reported that she had received threatening emails from the mistress warning her to stay away from Petraeus.

The authors say that Kelley's report may have started in the FBI investigation - but CIA officers pressured the Justice Department to keep the inquiry open.

Webb said his sources in the FBI told him federal agents wanted to close down their investigation when they learned that nothing illegal had happened, but they were told to keep digging. The FBI investigators, Webb says, never wanted to out Petraeus' affair.
The FBI reports to the Department of Justice, which is headed by Attorney General Eric Holder. Surely, something as big as investigating the CIA Director had to be something Holder was aware of. Based on the fact that the subject of the investigation was someone like Petraeus, Holder almost necessarily had to have approved pushing it forward, but to what end?

Was it - at least in part - to open the door for Brennan to head the CIA? Early indications are that authors Brandon Webb and Jack Murphy don't appear to go that far but they certainly piece together the groundwork for such a scenario.

Again, via the Daily Mail:
Murphy and co-author Brandon Webb also revealed that the September 11 Benghazi terrorist attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, was retaliation by Islamist militants who had been targeted by covert U.S. military operations.

The book claims that neither Stevens nor even Petraeus knew about the raids by American special operations troops, which had 'kicked a hornet's nest' among the heavily-armed fighters after the overthrow of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi.

John Brennan, President Barack Obama's Deputy National Security Adviser, had been authorizing 'unilateral operations in North Africa outside of the traditional command structure,' according to the e-book. Brennan is Obama's pick to replace Petraeus as head of the CIA.
If this is true, it would mean that Obama himself could be directly accountable for the attacks in Benghazi because Brennan was ordering these raids from the White House. As such, he was a direct arm of the Obama administration. These raids weren't just carried out on orders of the administration. They apparently weren't made known to the people who would ultimately face what could be identified as their consequences.
Petraeus was furious, they say, because he was kept in the dark about the raids being conducted without his knowledge by the Pentagon's Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) across Libya and North Africa.

Webb and Murphy claim that the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. consulate and a CIA outpost in Benghazi proved to Petraeus that he was an outsider in the Obama administration and that he would remain marginalized as long as he was at the CIA.

The central premise of 'Benghazi: The Definitive Report' is that the attacks were precipitated by secret raids JSOC had performed in Libya. An attack on the Islamist group Ansar al-Sharia days before September 11 may have been the final straw.
According to what Webb and Murphy are saying here, Petraeus was forced out and Brennan's orders to raid Islamist strongholds led to the Benghazi attacks on an unsuspecting consulate and CIA Annex. At least calling that last part into partial question is the fact that U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Sean Smith both seemed more than just a little concerned about coming under attack. Stevens sent cables to the State Department requesting more security and Smith made reference to losing his life while gaming from the consulate / Special Missions Compound (SMC) on the day of the attacks. That said, it's still possible that a growing threat was felt but not fully understood.

Check out this particularly explosive excerpt from the book. It seems to add credence to the concerns of Senator Rand Paul, raised during his questioning of Hillary Clinton last month:
John Brennan also ran a highly compartmentalized program out of the White House in regard to weapons transfers, and Stevens would not have been trusted with that type of information. Stevens likely helped consolidate as many weapons as possible after the war to safeguard them, at which point Brennan exported them overseas to start another conflict.
Ostensibly, that "exported them overseas" part is a reference to weapons sent from Libya (the annex?) to the Syrian rebels (via Turkey?).

If Petraeus and Stevens were kept in the dark relative to Brennan's raids and those raids served as the motivation for the attacks on the consulate and annex, that places blood directly on the hands of those behind Brennan's orders and secretiveness with respect to them. Under such a scenario, it would appear that Brennan is less qualified to be CIA Director than Petraeus was after the affair became public.

Also, if the claims of Webb and Murphy are true, Obama must certainly know that truth. If so, why would he be nominating Brennan to replace Petraeus unless he was fully behind what Brennan was allegedly doing?

That leads us directly to a covert, pro-Muslim Brotherhood strategy coming directly from the Obama White House, which brings us back to the claim made by Guandolo, that Brennan secretly converted to Islam while in Saudi Arabia and that he was turned by the Muslim Brotherhood specifically.

People might point to Brennan's orders to raid Islamist locations in Libya as evidence that he did NOT convert to Islam because his new religion would forbid him from attacking his own. In reality, the concept of Muruna, espoused by none other than the Brotherhood's most senior spiritual adviser - Yusuf al-Qaradawi - sanctions the killing of Muslims if doing so furthers the cause of Islam.

Again, just operating under the premise that Guandolo has already put forth...

If Brennan's objective was to raid Islamist strongholds for the purpose of confiscating weapons that could then be sent to the Syrian rebels in the latter's fight to overthrow Bashar al-Assad, such a thing would be perceived by the Brotherhood as a greater good.

The bottom line, however, is this: If Brennan was the guy behind operations that both left the consulate and the Annex unprepared to defend against attacks caused by White House policy AND if Brennan was the guy behind secretly ordering weapons be sent to Syrian rebels, all of that is made much worse by Obama's decision to nominate him for CIA Director in the first place.

That would tie Obama directly to gun-running from Libya to Syria and THAT would make Fast and Furious look like child's play by comparison.

The cherry on top would be this administration's attempt at gun control in the U.S. while arming al-Qaeda.

Friday, January 4, 2013

Al Jazeera's Doublespeak

A common refrain we here from those who defend Al Jazeera's purchase of Current TV is that over the last decade, it is an entity that has decided it wants to become a legitimate news organization and that Al Jazeera English is nothing like Al Jazeera Arabic. Is that not the recipe for doublespeak, where Islamists say one thing in English but something else completely different in Arabic?

Have we learned nothing from Yasser Arafat and Feisal Abdul Rauf?

In applying this test to Al Jazeera, consider two examples taken from Al Jazeera Arabic. One is Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader, Yusuf Al Qaradawi. The other is the cousin of Barack Hussein Obama, Musa Ismail Obama.

Yusuf Al Qaradawi
Perhaps the most prominent Muslim Brotherhood cleric, Qaradawi had been jailed in Egypt three times for his ties to the radical Islamic group. He ultimately fled to Qatar in 1961 and has been based there ever since. Something else that is based in Qatar is Al Jazeera, which is owned by the government there. As if that isn't disconcerting enough, Qaradawi has his own show on the network. Ironically, Qaradawi is banned from the United States, though the network that airs his program, which is seen by millions of people, will now have a base in New York, 9/11's ground zero.

For those who might be willing to believe that Al Jazeera had already completed its transformation into a legitimate news outlet by 2009, here is Qaradawi on Al Jazeera from that year (h/t Daily Caller):



That's right, Qaradawi has expressed praise for Hitler. He's consistently done so on Al Jazeera, which has given him his own show. How about this excerpt from one of his speeches that aired on the network that aired his show and is owned by the government which continues to provide him a platform:
"Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the [Jews] people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them - even though they exaggerated this issue - he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them. Allah willing, the next time will be at the hands of the believers."
In 2002, Al Jazeera aired an interview with David Duke and featured him as a credible western speaker who made the claim that the Mossad knew about 9/11 in advance and warned the Jews. If one is to believe that Al Jazeera changed its stripes since then, how does one explain Qaradawi's rhetoric as recently as 2009 being featured prominently on the network?

This would be akin to Al Gore selling his network to an entity that gives the KKK's grand kleagle his own show as part of its offering.

Musa Ismail Obama
In 2011, Barack Obama's cousin Musa was interviewed - in Arabic - on Al Jazeera. During that interview, Musa delivered several bombshells. One of them involved the Mama Sarah Children Foundation, which was named after Barack's step-Grandmother. Ostensibly, the intention of the foundation was to provide for underprivileged children.

However, in his interview with Al Jazeera, Musa explained that contributions, much of which comes from the United States, is used to send Kenyan students to Saudi Arabian schools to be educated in Wahhabism.

Check out this excerpt from Walid's piece on the Obamas' Wahhabist Fundraising Empire:
As a result of the flood of students into the Wahhabi Sharia universities in Saudi Arabia, the interviewer then asks regarding the excess: “So you are opening an avenue in other universities?” Musa then explains he had to send the excess to nearby Doha in Qatar, where he visited and arranged everything. When Al-Jazeera asked, “Do all these scholarships involve studying Arabic and Sharia?” Musa explained, “Some of those do not involve Sharia, like medicine or engineering.” Al-Jazeera then asks, “…but the majority involves what?” Musa answers: “Uuuhhh…. The majority of course is Sharia schools,” adding, “because my connection to the institutions is with Sharia schools.”
This necessarily means that an entity owned by the government of Qatar interviewed someone who claimed that Qatar was home to students who were being educated in the most virulent strain of Islam - Wahhabism - under the false pretense that the money contributed to the foundation responsible for sending those students to Qatar, was being used for humanitarian purposes.

Is it not a fair question to ask how many contributors had no intention to contribute to giving students a Wahhabist education? If they didn't know, they were defrauded. If fraud took place, Al Jazeera looked the other way, at best. Did Catholic Relief Services (CRS) know who it was partnering with when it did so with the Mama Sara Foundation?

Isn't all of this a glaring symptom of doublespeak? Didn't Ground Zero mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf do this when he spoke peace and tolerance to English audiences but said the following to Arabic audiences when advising them how to treat westerners:
“Deal with them as one courts a pretty girl he wants to date; stop thinking like a typical Muslim. Then you can engage.”
The truth is that Al Jazeera America (the proposed name for what used to be Current TV) is an extension of Al Jazeera, which is an extension of the Qatari government, which owns the Arabic network. Essentially, this makes Qatar ground zero for Al Jazeera.

In reality, the possibility that Al Jazeera hasn't changed at all since its days in the months and early years after 9/11/01 is very real.

Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Breitbart
Doug Ross
Drudge
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Instapundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Mediaite
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
NewsBusters
Newsmax
News Real
Pajamas Media
Politico
Powerline
Rasmussen
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive