Unreal! Inspector General Says Suspected Terrorists Were Hired To Guard Consulate In Benghazi

Inspector General: Suspected Terrorists Hired To Guard Consulate In Benghazi – CNS

.

.
Libyans suspected of bombing and vandalizing the U.S. consulate in Benghazi prior to the deadly attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens had been hired there as security guards by a British contractor, according to a report released June 13 by the State Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG)

“One guard who had been recently fired and another guard on the company’s payroll were suspected of throwing a homemade bomb into the U.S. compound 6 months before the attacks,” according to the OIG report.

“In addition, according to the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the Temporary Mission Facility in Benghazi had been vandalized and attacked in the months prior to the September 2012 attacks by some of the same guards who were there to protect it,” the report stated.

The Libyan guards were hired after “a casual recruiting and screening process” and received “minimal training,” according to a media reported cited in the audit of embassy security procedures in six countries.

The audit also found a criminal with “multiple false identities” working at a U.S. embassy due to limited oversight in the process required for vetting locals hired as security guards under the department’s $556 million Local Guard Program (LPG).

The guard “admitted to having a criminal history, which included two arrests and three cases of employing false identities to gain employment with local security contractors,” the OIG report stated.

A review of the guard’s personnel file, which “contained no local police background check,” also revealed ”an invalid current address, no explanation for travel outside of [redacted], incomplete details on previous work experience, false statements on having used other names, and criminal history.”

At the six embassies audited, whose locations were all redacted from the report, the OIG found “severe deficiencies” in the vetting process for embassy security guards.

In fact, none of the security contractors fully performed all of the vetting required under their contracts despite the fact that there were at least 272 significant attacks against U.S. diplomatic facilities and personnel between 1998 and 2012, placing “embassies and personnel at risk,” the report said.

A typical vetting includes a “police check covering criminal and/or subversive activities, a credit check, proof of successful previous employment with supervisor recommendations, and a personal residence check.” But out of a sample of 48 files examined by the OIG, “19 (40 percent) did not have police checks.”

In some cases, vetting requirements were not completed during the transition time between contractors until more than two years after the security guards had been placed on duty, the report noted. Even basic information such as “addresses and employment were missing from the local guard personnel files.”

The results of background checks must be cleared by a regional security officer (RSO) before any local guards can begin work at an embassy.

However, the OIG found that the RSOs, who are responsible for final approval of foreign nationals hired as embassy security guards, “frequently could not demonstrate that they had reviewed and approved the local guards employed to protect their posts.”

In one instance, “the RSO could not produce an accurate listing of all the local guards who worked at the embassy, and the project manager for the security contractor received an embassy badge without undergoing a background investigation or RSO approval.”

In some cases, local privacy laws prevented security contractors from fulfillling all of the required vetting. Other obstacles in less developed countries included lack of credit reporting services or the availability of official records such as birth certificates, the report stated.

The Office of Inspector General urged that these obstacles be taken into account in the vetting requirements so that contractors could still perform thorough checks of all hirees.

“Without modifying the Local Guard Program contract to reflect local conditions and limitations,” the report said, “the Department cannot hold the security contractor accountable for adhering to all the vetting requirements contained in.”

The inspector general also found that the security contractor at one embassy invoiced $1.48 million of monthly $100 supplemental wages between 2010 and 2013 that were never paid to the local guards.

On average, State Dept. contractors failed to pay $298,000, or between 15 and 25 percent of the full supplemental wages due to local security guards since 2010, according to the OIG. The State Department has since clarified how the supplemental wages should be distributed, and the Bureau of Administration is in the process of deciding the total amount of monies owed.

The OIG made a number of recommendations to the embassies to beef up their security procedures, many of which have already been completed. But other embassies are still in the process of demonstrating full compliance, the report noted.

CNSNews.com contacted the State Department multiple times for comment but did not receive a response.

.

.

General Thomas McInerney Says Evidence Will Show ‘Dereliction Of Duty’ In Benghazi

Gen. McInerney: Evidence Will Show ‘Dereliction Of Duty’ In Benghazi – CNS

Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney says he believes the evidence will show that President Obama and top administration officials were guilty of a “dereliction of duty” both during and after the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya that cost the lives of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

.

.
“Verification of what the National Command Authority knew and when they knew it is extremely important as it will show, I believe, that there was dereliction of duty by the President, the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of State, and the CIA Director,” Lt. Gen. McInerney said at a joint conference with military and legal experts held by the Heritage Foundation and the Benghazi Accountability Coalition on Monday.

“That is a very serious charge. That is a very serious charge, and it was done in violation of the law of the United States,” declared Gen. McInerney, who served as an assistant vice chief of staff in the Air Force’s Washington headquarters, and was part of a group calling for a select committee to investigate the events in Benghazi back in March.

“It absolutely boggles my mind that we did not have pre-positioned forces in that area,” McInerney said, adding that he knows the region well because he was a commander there when the U.S. attacked Libya in April 1986.

“We didn’t do these things. That points to dereliction of duty,” he said.

After Amb. Stevens notified the State Department that the consulate in Benghazi was under attack, “we should have launched F-16s and tankers and they could have been airborne in two hours… But nothing was done,” McInerney said.

“The Foreign Emergency Support Team, can you believe this, was up in Croatia. What was it doing in Croatia? Were we having riots in Croatia? So again, dereliction of duty.”

Another military panelist at the conference said that greater issues are at stake than the loss of American lives.

“This whole thing is not just about the lives of four people,” asserted retired Army Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin. “This is about the character of America. This is about who we are as a nation. This about the violation of our most fundamental ethos in this nation… We don’t leave people behind.”

The conference was held in Washington as the House Select Committee on Benghazi begins its probe of the events surrounding the deadly Sept. 12, 2012 assault.

The investigation is also expected to take a new turn with the American military’s capture of Ahmed Abu Khattala Sunday. Abu Khattala, a member of the Ansar al-Sharia militia group, is one of the suspected masterminds behind the Benghazi terrorist attacks.

President Barack Obama stated in a Tuesday press release that “with this operation, the United States has once again demonstrated that we will do whatever it takes to see that justice is done when people harm Americans. We will continue our efforts to bring to justice those who were responsible for the Benghazi attacks.”

Demands for accountability first began after terrorists stormed the diplomatic consulate in Benghazi, which then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice blamed on a “spontaneous protest” allegedly motivated by an anti-Islamic video.

However, both the State Department and the Associated Press independently confirmed in October 2012 that no demonstrations had occurred outside the compound before the raid.

After multiple congressional hearings, the Senate Intelligence Committee declassified a report in January showing that “the attacks were preventable, based on extensive intelligence reporting on the terrorist activity in Libya… and given the known security shortfalls at the U.S. Mission.”

On May 8, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) created the Select Committee on Benghazi after Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, released State Department documents claiming that the attack was “rooted in an Internet video, and not a failure of policy.”

But not everyone in Washington welcomed the renewed attempt to find out what really happened in Benghazi.

“I think it’s a hunting mission for a lynch mob,” Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) told CNN on May 18. “They [questions about Benghazi] were certainly answered to the satisfaction of the Senate Intelligence Committee.”

In a June 9 interview with ABC’s Diane Sawyer, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “What I do not appreciate is politicizing this at the expense of four dead Americans… I do not believe our great country should be playing minor league ball. We ought to be in the majors,” and calling the Select Committee’s work “a diversion from the hard work that the Congress should be doing about the problems facing our country and the world.”

.

.

Captured Benghazi Suspect Ahmed Abu Khattallah Worked For The U.S.

Shocker: Seized Benghazi Suspect Worked For U.S. – WorldNetDaily

Benghazi suspect Ahmed Abu Khattallah, seized by the U.S. on Sunday, once served as a key conduit in an effort staged by the U.S. and Arab interests to aid insurgents fighting in Libya and later in Syria, according to informed Middle Eastern security officials.

.

.
It was not immediately clear whether Khattallah himself worked directly with the Americans or if he knew he was part of an effort that involved the U.S..

He did, however, receive funds for his participation in a nexus coordinated by the U.S., Saudis, Turkey and other Arab countries to recruit the fighters that ultimately toppled Muammar Gadhafi’s regime, the security officials said.

Khattallah, the senior leader of the Benghazi branch of the Ansar al-Sharia terrorist organization, was later instrumental in helping to recruit fighters from inside Libya to travel to Syria to aid in the insurgency targeting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime in 2011, the officials said.

Khattallah’s participation came to a grinding halt following the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi attacks in which he is accused of participating.

Ansar al-Sharia was not yet declared a terrorist organization by the State Department during the period of Khatallah’s alleged work to help recruit Mideast rebels.

Prior to the Benghazi attacks, the U.S. relationship with those linked to Khattalah’s group was so comfortable that it was the February 17th Martyrs Brigade, an Ansar al-Sharia offshoot, that officially served as the armed quick reaction force within the U.S. Special Mission in Benghazi.

In August 2013, almost one year after the assault, the U.S. filed the first criminal charges in the Benghazi attack against Khatallah, who was placed by witnesses at the scene during the initial assault on the U.S. Special Mission.

Khatallah’s al-Qaida-linked Ansar al-Sharia group advocates strict Shariah implementation and the creation of the Islamic Caliphate. The group infamously first took credit for the attack in social media while later claiming it “didn’t participate [in the attack] as a sole entity.” Witnesses told the media that not only did they see Ansar al-Sharia men laying siege to the compound, they also spotted vehicles brandishing Ansar al-Sharia’s logo at the scene.

Twelve days after Benghazi attacks, WND first reported on information from Middle Eastern security sources indicating both the U.S. mission and the nearby CIA annex in Benghazi served as a planning center for U.S. aid to rebels in the Middle East, with particular emphasis on shipping weapons to jihadists fighting the Assad regime in Syria.

Egyptian and other Middle Eastern sources said that just after the attacks that Ambassador Chris Stevens himself played a central role in recruiting and vetting jihadists and coordinating arms shipments to the gunmen fighting Assad’s regime in Syria.

Stevens’ original role in Libya was to serve as the main interlocutor between the Obama administration and the rebels based in Benghazi.

The news media churned out numerous reports of U.S.-coordinated arms being funneled to the anti-Gadhafi rebels starting at about the time Stevens arrived in Libya.

In December 2012, the New York Times reported the Obama administration “secretly gave its blessing to arms shipments to Libyan rebels from Qatar last year.”

The article went on to say that the weapons and money from Qatar “strengthened militant groups in Libya, allowing them to become a destabilizing force since the fall of the Gadhafi government.” The weapons came from Qatar and not the United States, according to the Times.

In March 2011, Reuters exclusively reported Obama had signed a secret order authorizing covert U.S. government support for the rebel forces in Libya seeking to oust Gadhafi, quoting U.S. government officials.

Also that month, the U.K.-based Independent reported that “the Americans have asked Saudi Arabia if it can supply weapons to the rebels in Benghazi.”

The Times reported on March 25, 2013, that after the fall of Gadhafi, the U.S. began to coordinate aid, including weapons shipments, to the Syrian rebels in early 2012.

The Times reported in its March 2013 article the weapons airlifts to Syria began on a small scale and continued intermittently through the fall of 2012, expanding into a steady and much heavier flow later that year.

From offices at “secret locations,” American intelligence officers “helped the Arab governments shop for weapons… and have vetted rebel commanders and groups to determine who should receive the weapons as they arrive,” according to the report.

The CIA declined to comment to the Times on the shipments to Syria or its role in them.

.

.

Brigitte Gabriel Sets Whiny, Muslim Woman Straight During ‘Benghazi Accountability Coalition’ Event (Videos)

Brigitte Gabriel Gives Fantastic Answer To Muslim Woman Claiming All Muslims Are Portrayed Badly – Right Scoop

This Heritage event on Benghazi has gotten a lot of press over the last day or two, with the left claiming the event turned ‘ugly‘ and that the Muslim woman was ‘pounced on’ and ‘bullied’ by members of the panel.

But after watching it myself, that characterization couldn’t be more wrong. In fact Brigitte Gabriel’s answer to this Muslim woman is perhaps the best answer I’ve ever heard to the ‘peaceful Muslims’ question.

.
GABRIEL CLIP

.
ENTIRE EVENT

.

.

Filmmaker Blamed By Obama For Benghazi Attack Actually A Muslim Agent Who Worked With The U.S. Government

Explosive: Filmmaker ‘Behind The Benghazi Attack’ Found To Be A Confirmed Muslim Agent Who Worked With US Government – Shoebat Foundation

In a Shoebat.com EXCLUSIVE, a woman who starred in the controversial video that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton blamed for the attacks in Benghazi, has come to us with a STUNNING revelation that the man who produced the video recently confessed to her that he is a Muslim – twice. According to Cindy Lee Garcia, who is also the plaintiff in a lawsuit against Google and Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the maker of the infamous “Innocence of Muslims” video, responded “Yes” both times after being asked by Garcia if he is a Muslim.

In a recorded phone call with Ben Barrack, Garcia said she contacted Nakoula approximately three weeks ago and twice asked Nakoula if he was Muslim. Both times, Nakoula said that he was. Listen to the interview below:

.

.
Lest one doubt the credibility of Garcia’s claims, once they are viewed in conjunction with a myriad of discoveries by Shoebat.com [here, here, here, here, here, and here], it constitutes the near completion of an intricate puzzle; everything fits.

.

Cindy Lee Garcia: Starred in anti-Muhammad Video; says filmmaker told her he is a Muslm.

.
Very soon after the Benghazi attacks, we had reason to believe that not only were administration officials lying to the American people about the video’s role in the attacks but that they were not telling the truth about the administration’s role in the production of the video itself.

Garcia’s revelation now confirms our suspicions about why Nakoula contacted Shoebat.com, requesting that we cease and desist from exposing the truth about this story [recorded]. At the time, Nakoula admitted to being in contact not just with Eiad but with an entire family of Muslim fundamentalists after the video, which should have caused him to be ostracized, not embraced.

As first revealed by Shoebat.com, when Nakoula was given a lesser jail sentence in 2009 in exchange for his help in securing the arrest of his partner-in-crime, Eiad Salameh, it couldn’t have been the true reason for Nakoula’s lighter sentence.

Why? Because in January of 2011, Eiad was arrested by the Canadian Peel Police and the FBI would not take him, despite multiple attempts by Canadian authorities to get them to do so. After several months, the Canadians put Eiad on a plane back to Palestine.

So, why was Nakoula given a lighter sentence if not to help arrest Eiad? As a Muslim who portrayed himself as a Christian filmmaker, Nakoula was acting deceptively while also pushing the agenda of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the group’s “Istanbul Process”, a series of meetings designed to create the climate for non-Muslim governments to enact laws that make criticism of Islam a criminal offense.

The Obama administration itself is on board with this agenda. Then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton chaired the very first meeting in Istanbul on July 15, 2011, as Shoebat.com has reported.

Moreover, this was approximately the same point in time when Eiad was sent packing by the Canadians and Nakoula began casting for his video.

Eiad is a Muslim who is also Walid Shoebat’s first cousin. Shoebat knows Eiad well. The notion that Eiad would consort with a Coptic Christian doesn’t square with reality. This alone lends credibility to Garcia’s claim.

When taken together will all of our discoveries, Garcia’s claims do something far more damaging to the Obama administration. They even further bolster the possibility – now even strong likelihood – that Nakoula, in his capacity as an agent of the U.S. Federal government was commissioned by the Obama administration to produce the video.

Knowing what you know now, the biggest lies told by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama very well may be that the “United States Government had absolutely NOTHING to do with this video”.

.

.

.
This also confirms that…

Evidence reveals that when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, she conspired with President Barack Obama to snuff out criticism of Islam with a contrived and diabolical assault on the first amendment. Curiously unprompted, Obama and Hillary so vehemently insisted they had “nothing to do with” the anti-Muhammad video, but as it turns out, the opposite is true, they did play a role, counter to their claims.

On September 10th, Ambassador Christopher Stevens boarded a plane from Tripoli to the city from which he would never return alive. The meeting between Stevens and Turkey’s Consul General Ali Sait Akin that concluded little more than one hour prior to Stevens’ death has come to signify a troubling level of collaboration between the leadership of the countries both men represented.

.

Christopher Stevens Itinerary for Benghazi.

.
Two days prior to Stevens’ arrival in Benghazi, a conference in Istanbul, Turkey that was all but ignored, was wrapping up. The conference was billed as an interfaith event entitled, “The Arab Awakening and Peace in the New Middle East: Muslim and Christian Perspectives” and was held on September 7-8, 2012. The final communiqué of the meeting included assaults on the first amendment:

Participants argued that discourses and languages used in the media, popular culture, schools and religious centers are extremely important. Religious leaders and decision makers should lead a process of reforming these areas.

One of the speakers at the conference was Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, whose relevance will be made known shortly.

As Shoebat.com has reported, joining Davutoğlu in Istanbul were two Muslim Brotherhood spies. One is former chairman of perhaps the most notorious mosque in the U.S., Bassam Estwani and the other a man named Rateb Al-Nabulsi. In the photo below, Estwani can be seen in front of a banner that displays the date “September 7-8, 2012″ (see photo below) of the conference ignored by western media:

.
………………….
Bassam Estwani in Istanbul days before Benghazi attacks.

.
As the conference was taking place in Istanbul, a Muslim fundamentalist in Egypt named Wisam Abdul Waris who prior to the fiasco in Egypt stated the plan to attack the first amendment called for the criminalization of any defamation of Islam and then publicly denounced the anti-Muhammad video which the Obama administration would blame for the Benghazi attacks as Shoebat.com reported.

.
…………
Estwani (L) and al-Nabulsi (R) in Istanbul in September, 2012.

.
A little more than one year earlier, another conference was held in Istanbul. It was chaired by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Secretary-General of the OIC, and Turkey’s Foreign Minister. It would come to be known as the very first meeting of the “Istanbul Process”. Was the meeting in Istanbul two days before Stevens arrived in Benghazi part of the “Istanbul Process” remains to be discovered.

.
………………….
Estwani (R) and Turkey’s Foreign Minister Davutoglu in Istanbul during September, 2012 conference.

.
The location, the theme, and the syncronized efforts in Egypt and Turkey all help make that case; Turkey played behind the scenes and Egypt was the first to spark the riots against U.S. Embassy in Cairo. But there is more to tie our argument.

The Istanbul Meeting that Kicked off the “Istanbul Process”

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) had been pushing for criminalizing criticism of Islam for years, as far back as 1999. However, the objective of the OIC – to make illegal “defamation of religions” – needed a moderation makeover, which led to the “Istanbul Process”, kicked off officially in the city of its namesake, little more than one year prior to the Benghazi attacks. The agenda was intended to give a facelift to UN Resolution 16/18, which was adopted earlier that year by the Human Rights Council.

.

July 15, 2011: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu, and Turkey Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu (L to R).

.
Hillary Clinton attended and Co-chaired this event with then Secretary General of the OIC – Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu – and Foreign Minister Davutoğlu – on July 15, 2011.

(Note: For reasons that will be made relevant shortly, this meeting took place in the same month that the maker of the anti-Muhammad video began casting)

In her speech, Hillary said:

…together we have begun to overcome the false divide that pits religious sensitivities against freedom of expression, and we are pursuing a new approach based on concrete steps to fight intolerance wherever it occurs. Under this resolution, the international community is taking a strong stand for freedom of expression and worship, and against discrimination and violence based upon religion or belief… we now need to move to implementation. The resolution calls upon states to protect freedom of religion, to counter offensive expression through education, interfaith dialogue, and public debate, and to prohibit discrimination, profiling, and hate crimes, but not to criminalize speech unless there is an incitement to imminent violence.

Perhaps not so coincidentally, Clinton foreshadowed what would happen a little more than one year later in Benghazi and at home:

In the United States, I will admit, there are people who still feel vulnerable or marginalized as a result of their religious beliefs. And we have seen how the incendiary actions of just a very few people, a handful in a country of nearly 300 million, can create wide ripples of intolerance. We also understand that, for 235 years, freedom of expression has been a universal right at the core of our democracy. So we are focused on promoting interfaith education and collaboration, enforcing antidiscrimination laws, protecting the rights of all people to worship as they choose, and to use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming, so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor.

Hillary’s Co-chair, İhsanoğlu – himself a Turk – echoed this sentiment, saying:

“We continue to be particularly disturbed by attitudes of certain individuals or groups exploiting the freedom of expression to incite hatred by demonizing purposefully the religions and their followers. Though we respect their freedom of opinion and expression, we find these attitudes politically and ethically incorrect and insensitive.”

The meeting in Istanbul would essentially be the precursor to a series of annual summits that would constitute “The Istanbul Process”. The first convened in Washington and was hosted by Clinton in December of 2011, at a time when a certain anti-Muhammad video was being produced.

The second took place in London, less than three months after the Benghazi attacks and one month after the anti-Muhammad filmmaker was sent to prison.

At the time of the London summit, the optics of the filmmaker being locked up were no doubt supposed to impress the OIC. However, in the U.S., Nakoula couldn’t be imprisoned for speech; Americans wouldn’t stand for it. Instead, he was jailed for violating parole. The perception that he was jailed for speech was allowed to fester.

The most likely option is that the Obama administration was attempting to play both sides of the fence.

Anti-Muhammad Video Produced by Federal Informant / OIC Agent

As Shoebat.com has gone to great lengths to demonstrate, the maker of the anti-Muhammad video, a man known as Nakoula Basseley Nakoula was a U.S. federal informant at the time of Clinton’s speech. Based on the public statements of both Hillary and Obama’s envoy to the OIC, Rashad Hussain, Nakoula would have made a perfect OIC agent as well because he represented a face of the public, not the government.

In 2009, Nakoula was given a lesser sentence after pleading guilty for his role in a bank fraud scheme. In return, he was to help authorities catch the ringleader of that operation – my cousin Eiad Salameh.

That’s right, as the new language found in the “Istanbul Process” facelift was being presented, Nakoula was an agent of Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department. In exchange for having one year taken off his sentence, Nakoula was supposed to help the feds nab Salameh.

We now know that was NOT the reason Nakoula became an informant.

How do we know this?

.
…………
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula arrested by LAPD on 9/15/12

.
In January of 2011 – just six months prior to Clinton’s speech – I was contacted by Jeffrey Mason of the Canadian Peel Police. I was told that my cousin was in their custody. Canadian authorities attempted to hand Salameh over to the FBI for seven months but to no avail. Ultimately, Salameh was put on a plane back to Palestine.

Nakoula began casting for his video in July of 2011. Not only was this the same month that the conference in Istanbul took place but it’s about the same time Canadian authorities stopped trying to hand over the guy Nakoula was given a lighter sentence to help the feds apprehend!

Logically, Nakoula was still on the hook with the feds because the stated reason for his lighter sentence was not the real reason for it. After the Benghazi attacks, Nakoula would do that year in prison, just like Hillary promised Charles Woods – the father of murdered Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods – three days after the Benghazi attacks.

House Select Committee on Benghazi

As was recently detailed by Shoebat.com, one of the U.S. Congressmen who understands what the “Istanbul Process” is really all about sits on the House Select Committee on Benghazi. His name is Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA) and he will have no excuse if this dynamic is not part of the Committee’s investigation.

.
………………….
Westmoreland: Sent warnings to State about “Istanbul Process” 90 days before Benghazi attacks.

.
In a letter sent to the Deputy Inspector General (IG) at the State Department exactly 90 days prior to the Benghazi attacks, Westmoreland wrote in part (as a co-signatory):

The State Department and, in several cases, the specific direction of the Secretary of State, have taken actions recently that have been enormously favorable to the Muslim Brotherhood and its interests. These include:

A succession of meetings with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) – a multinational group that is, like the Muslim Brotherhood, determined to impose shariah worldwide. These are now known as “the Istanbul Process” and we are aimed at finding ways to accommodate the OIC’s demands for restrictions on freedom of expression guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, so as to preclude “blasphemy” against Islam and its adherents.

Deputy IG Howard Geisel was given 90 days to respond to these concerns. On the 90th day, Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans were murdered in Benghazi without a response from Geisel.

.
………………….
Geisel: Ignored warnings about “Istanbul Process” 90 days before Benghazi.

.
Obama’s Islamic Envoy to the OIC

When it comes to Rashad Hussain, as Shoebat.com has demonstrated, the mask is off. Hussain – a State Department employee – is an infiltrator whose allegiances lie with the OIC, not the U.S. Constitution he swore an oath to uphold. As such, Hussain’s agenda is one that ultimately seeks the criminalization of criticism of Islam.

Earlier this year, Hussain was at the fourth annual “Istanbul Process” summit, held in Doha, Qatar. During his speech, he actually boasted about working with a confirmed Muslim Brotherhood front group that seeks the destruction of the United States from within:

Over the past couple of years I have been involved with an initiative lead (sic) by the Islamic Society of North America and Islamic scholars in the Muslim world to issue a declaration articulating standards and protocols for the protection of full citizenship rights of minorities in the Muslim world.

Also in his speech, Hussain picked up on Hillary Clinton’s meme that governments are limited with regard to criminalizing forms of expression and that it must be done via other means. Hussain continued:

Relying on governments to ban certain speech often ignores the root causes of bigotry, and many religious communities have found that improving education, interfaith dialogue, and media awareness are effective tools for combatting (sic) intolerance. The Istanbul Process that we are here participating in today is meant to promote implementation of those important measures.

There you have it. The “Istanbul Process” is about using the people and movements to push the agenda. In reality, however, governments are by definition the entities responsible. This sets up perfectly, the conditions for an agent of a government to do something so outrageous that he creates the climate for popular opinion to do what the government could not.

.
…………
Hussain with close Hillary Clinton adviser and Muslim Sisterhood daughter Huma Abedin at White House Ramadan dinner in 2011.

.
Using a government agent to masquerade as a private citizen who produces an anti-Muhammad video that would cause riots in the Middle East is a perfectly fitting puzzle piece.

One year earlier, in 2013, the “Istanbul Process” summit was held in Geneva. A detailed account of the proceedings included this observation:

The US and several European states emphasised their preference for social and cultural measures over legal ones. These states argued that criminalisation is often inappropriate, ineffective, and even counterproductive. “Good speech” is what defeats intolerance and hate, rather than restrictions on speech itself. OIC states, on the other hand, presented criminalisation as “a matter of vital concern”, imperative to the full implementation of Resolution 16/18.

In order to play both sides of this fence, the Obama administration would have to:

1.) Find someone who was beholden to the administration.
2.) Create the perception that said individual was acting as a private citizen.
3.) Have this private citizen produce something viewed as incendiary by the Muslim world.
4.) Provide a platform for the production of this material to be delivered to the masses.
5.) Point to this material as inflammatory and something people should “abhor”.

Nakoula was the poster child of a figure who could thread this needle.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

U.S. Spy Agencies Heard Benghazi Attackers Using State Department Cell Phones To Call Terrorist Leaders (Video)

US Spy Agencies Heard Benghazi Attackers Using State Dept. Cell Phones To Call Terrorist Leaders – Fox News

The terrorists who attacked the U.S. consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 used cell phones, seized from State Department personnel during the attacks, and U.S. spy agencies overheard them contacting more senior terrorist leaders to report on the success of the operation, multiple sources confirmed to Fox News.

The disclosure is important because it adds to the body of evidence establishing that senior U.S. officials in the Obama administration knew early on that Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and not a spontaneous protest over an anti-Islam video that had gone awry, as the administration claimed for several weeks after the attacks.

Eric Stahl, who recently retired as a major in the U.S. Air Force, served as commander and pilot of the C-17 aircraft that was used to transport the corpses of the four casualties from the Benghazi attacks – then-U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, information officer Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods – as well as the assault’s survivors from Tripoli to the safety of an American military base in Ramstein, Germany.

In an exclusive interview on Fox News’ “Special Report,” Stahl said members of a CIA-trained Global Response Staff who raced to the scene of the attacks were “confused” by the administration’s repeated implication of the video as a trigger for the attacks, because “they knew during the attack… who was doing the attacking.” Asked how, Stahl told anchor Bret Baier: “Right after they left the consulate in Benghazi and went to the [CIA] safehouse, they were getting reports that cell phones, consulate cell phones, were being used to make calls to the attackers’ higher ups.”

A separate U.S. official, one with intimate details of the bloody events of that night, confirmed the major’s assertion. The second source, who requested anonymity to discuss classified data, told Fox News he had personally read the intelligence reports at the time that contained references to calls by terrorists – using State Department cell phones captured at the consulate during the battle – to their terrorist leaders. The second source also confirmed that the security teams on the ground received this intelligence in real time.

Major Stahl was never interviewed by the Accountability Review Board, the investigative panel convened, pursuant to statute, by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as the official body reviewing all the circumstances surrounding the attacks and their aftermath. Many lawmakers and independent experts have criticized the thoroughness of the ARB, which also never interviewed Clinton.

In his interview on “Special Report,” Stahl made still other disclosures that add to the vast body of literature on Benghazi – sure to grow in the months ahead, as a select House committee prepares for a comprehensive probe of the affair, complete with subpoena power. Stahl said that when he deposited the traumatized passengers at Ramstein, the first individual to question the CIA security officers was not an FBI officer but the senior State Department diplomat on the ground.

“They were taken away from the airplane,” Stahl said. “The U.S. ambassador to Germany [Philip D. Murphy] met us when we landed and he took them away because he wanted to debrief them that night.” Murphy stepped down as ambassador last year. A message left with Sky Blue FC, a private company in New Jersey with which Murphy is listed online as an executive officer, was not immediately returned.

Stahl also contended that given his crew’s alert status and location, they could have reached Benghazi in time to have played a role in rescuing the victims of the assault, and ferrying them to safety in Germany, had they been asked to do so. “We were on a 45-day deployment to Ramstein air base,” he told Fox News. “And we were there basically to pick up priority missions, last-minute missions that needed to be accomplished.”

“You would’ve thought that we would have had a little bit more of an alert posture on 9/11,” Stahl added. “A hurried-up timeline probably would take us [an] hour-and-a-half to get off the ground and three hours and fifteen minutes to get down there. So we could’ve gone down there and gotten them easily.”

.

.
Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.