In a letter addressed to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa and member Jason Chaffetz point to documents recovered by Foreign Policy as evidence that Libyan security forces had been infiltrated prior to the 9/11/12 attack that killed four Americans. The letters – one addressed to Mohamed Obeidi, head of Libyan Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Benghazi and the other to the Benghazi police chief – are dated 9/11/12 and are quite specific.
According to a November 1, 2012, Foreign Policy article titled “‘Troubling’ Surveillance Before Benghazi Attack,” drafts of two letters were uncovered at the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi. The documents, written immediately prior to the attack on September 11, 2012, indicate that the compound was under “troubling” surveillance and that Chief of Mission personnel were complaining to the Libyan government that it had failed to fulfill requests for additional security. The unsigned documents express justifiable fears about the status of security at the compound on the day of the attack. They were reportedly recovered by journalists during a visit to the compound on October 26, 2012, many days after Federal Bureau of Investigation agents had already visited the compound to collect evidence.
The letter addressed to Obeidi concludes thusly:
“Finally, early this morning at 0643, September 11, 2012, one of our diligent guards made a troubling report. Near our main gate, a member of the police force was seen in the upper level of a building across from our compound. It is reported that this person was photographing the inside of the U.S. special mission and furthermore that this person was part of the police unit sent to protect the mission. The police car stationed where this event occurred was number 322.”
This is a clear indication that the Benghazi police had been infiltrated by forces and individuals sympathetic to the attackers.
Such infiltration would seem to be consistent with our findings relative to Al-Qaeda ‘brother’ (words of Ayman al-Zawahiri) Abdel Hakim Belhaj being put in charge of security for the entire city of Tripoli in 2011-2012, to include security at all embassies there.
One more question…
Twitter
[...] Issa and Chaffetz demanding answers from Hillary about Benghazi [...]
[...] Specifically. addressed. to. Hillary’s. office. Here’s the video (h/t Right Scoop): Ok, so it was “route(d)” out of Hillary’s office to an appropriate under secretary / bureau head tasked with heeding the very specific pleas of our ambassador. Yet, no one has been disciplined for not heeding what amounts to a distress signal, an S.O.S., a cry for help. Why? When someone discusses “Hillary Clinton’s office” does that include herDeputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin? Did Abedin see any of these cables at any time? Based on her background, that is an extremely relevant question that needs to be answered. We are not alleging that Abedin saw the cable or had anything to do with it not being acted on. However, her potential access to and influence with Secretary Clinton in such situations, coupled with her familial connections / conflicts of interest when it comes to the Muslim Brotherhood, demonstrate perfectly why she should have been disqualified from holding the position she now holds. Here is an extremely important point to consider. Huma Abedin’s parents were put in charge of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA) by a representative of the founder of the IMMA – Abdullah Omar Naseef. Naseef also has a history of being an al-Qaeda financier. Huma herself served on the IMMA Board WITH NASEEF from at least 1996 – 2003 and continued to serve on IMMA’s Board until 2008 / 2009, when she assumed her current role. Based on these unassailable facts, should someone with Abedin’s background be working in Hillary’s “office”, especially when the reach of that office extends to danger spots for Americans in Muslim lands? Again, we are in no way saying that Abedin had any knowledge of this cable whatsoever but we are saying that the circumstances leading up to the attack on the consulate, as well as who Stevens viewed as a threat (Al-Qaeda and Ansar Al-Sharia), illustrates perfectly why someone with Abedin’s background should not be put in the position. Such a person’s associations matter, not because of guilt or innocence but because of potential conflicts of interest in matters of allegiance. Here is a compelling interview between Fox News Channel’s Bill Hemmer and Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. This interview was approximately twelve hours prior to Herridge’s interview with Greta but note how angry Gowdy is. While he is clearly pointing directly to the White House, he is also wanting answers from the State Department:” http://www.shoebat.com/2012/11/01/contents-of-classified-state-department-cable-illustrate-why-huma-abedin-should-not-be-hillarys-deputy-chief-of-staff/ - http://www.shoebat.com/2012/11/02/issa-and-chaffetz-demanding-answers-from-hillary-about-benghazi/ [...]