It didn’t take long for many in the Muslim world to exploit the 9/11/12 attack in Benghazi by doing what the Obama administration did – they pointed to the Innocence of Muslims video. The video was being held up as an example of why it’s wrong to criticize anything Islam. We learned that before the attack, forces were already at work, plotting to call on international bodies as well as national governments to make any speech against or criticism of Islam a crime. At the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI), Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi called for restrictions on free speech.
The Obama administration pointed to the video as well. However, as the weeks have passed, a specific motive for doing so has been attributed to the administration. As the thinking goes, Obama and his team were using the video as an excuse so that the lack of security would not be exposed. It makes perfect sense. On October 19th, in a letter to Obama, Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa accused the administration of looking to “normalize” Libya despite an opposite reality on the ground. It’s become widely accepted that Obama, Hillary, et. al. wanted to use the video as a distraction and as an excuse.
This would necessarily mean that Islamists and the administration had adopted the same narrative but for different reasons.
Charles Woods, the father of Tyrone Woods, may have called that entire premise into question when he called in to the Lars Larson show on October 24th. In describing his visit with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when the casket of his son and three other Americans arrived in at Andrews Air Force Base three days after their deaths.
Take note of what Charles says he was told by Hillary Clinton, beginning at the 6:15 mark (h/t Gather):
“We’re going to have that person arrested and prosecuted that did the video.”
I’ll explain why this is potentially so very important, after the clip.
If Hillary Clinton was willing to “prosecute” the filmmaker, this puts her in direct opposition to the Constitution she swore an oath to uphold. It also potentially calls into question the premise that the video was used solely as an excuse to cover-up the lack of security at Benghazi.
Here is Hillary speaking at Andrews on the day that four caskets containing the bodies of four dead Americans. Beginning at the 6:15 mark, Hillary essentially points to the video and indignantly says the U.S. Government had “nothing to do with (making it)”.
This begs a very serious question: If the administration was only using the video as an excuse to prevent the truth about what happened in Benghazi from coming to light, why would Hillary take that a step further and tell the father of Tyrone Woods that the filmmaker would be prosecuted?
Such a reality doesn’t just put the Obama administration on the same page with Islamists when it comes to blaming the video (but for different reasons). It actually suggests that the reasons for pointing to the video were the same.
If Hillary told Charles Woods that the filmmaker would be prosecuted, it meant that she was interested in criminalizing criticism of Islam as well. That would be a direct attack on the first amendment, which is something even the Obama administration is not yet willing to be seen as doing. Obama himself, in a PSA for Pakistan in which he appeared with Hillary, wouldn’t go that far publicly, saying there was “no justification for this senseless violence… none”. Again, Hillary accentuated the assertion that the “United States Government had absolutely nothing to do with this video” (I have always been intrigued by how adamantly she has stated that).
It’s important not to forget that Hillary’s Deputy Chief of Staff and closest advisor – Huma Abedin – has extremely close and irrefutable ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, Abedin’s mother Saleha and Mohamed Mursi’s wife are two of 63 leaders in the Muslim Sisterhood, which makes them close colleagues. Yes, that’s the same Mursi who spoke at the CGI several days after the Benghazi attack and said there should be limits to free speech. Isn’t it possible that the Abedins share that view? Isn’t it also possible for Huma to influence Hillary to adopt it?
Islamists have been pointing to the video in order to target our first amendment rights. Was the Obama administration attempting to do the same thing?
Threatening to prosecute someone for exercising his first amendment rights makes that possibility far more plausible.
This latest development does not mean the filmmaker – Nakoula Basseley Nakoula – doesn’t warrant further investigation relative to his associations and motives for making the video. Both remain highly suspect and require more sunlight.
Ben Barrack is a talk show host and author of the book, Unsung Davids, which features a chapter on Walid Shoebat