Where Allen West went WRONG about Benghazi

By Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack

When will the right ever get it all right? While Allen West may be right about Benghazi being about weapons trafficking, he doesn’t have an answer as to the motives of the attackers. Would the terrorists who attacked the compound have done so because Benghazi was about weapons trafficking? That makes no sense. Exhaustive research conducted by Shoebat.com presents evidence that debunks one of West’s conclusions.

West: Right about Weapons Trafficking; wrong to dismiss Kidnapping.

West: Right about Weapons Trafficking; wrong to dismiss Kidnapping.

West has relayed some of the details of a conversation he had with an alleged witness to the Benghazi attacks. Part of his account comports with the findings brought to you by Shoebat.com [here, and here,]. West also dismisses a possibility that should not yet be dismissed. Often, things perceived as having to be necessarily mutually exclusive are not at all.

First, here is what West had to say about what was going on in Benghazi, as relayed to him by a co-passenger on a recent flight who claimed to have been a witness to the attacks:

…I learned, as I presumed, that there was a covert weapons scheme going on in Libya, Benghazi. We had been supplying radical Islamists with weapons against Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi, effectively supplying the enemy and destabilizing that country. And it seems that there was a CIA weapons buy-back program, the aim of which was to ship the retrieved weapons out of Libya through Turkey, and to the Islamist forces in Syria.

That account comports with our findings as well but West is also a bit too presumptive in dismissing another allegation, that Stevens was to be kidnapped and exchanged for Omar Abdel Rahman (the “Blind Sheikh”):

No, it was not about a kidnapping scheme, it was about something, as I’ve stated, that will make Iran-Contra look like Romper Room. The web of lies spun is coming apart, and all other committee hearings on this matter should be shut down.

That Benghazi included a kidnapping operation should not be dismissed simply because of a confirmed weapons trafficking operation. Could not both be true? After all, the Community Organizer in Chief rules by his hero’s playbook, which states:

Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose.

In fact, West’s account of his conversation actually lends credence to the possibility that there may have been a kidnapping operation in play:

I came to understand why Ambassador Chris Stevens was there in the first place and that he had in fact requested better security but was denied – the question is, by whom? And I learned that the Martyrs of 17 February Brigade were in charge of security and were the ones who opened the gates, then fled.

If Stevens was in Benghazi to manage a weapons trafficking operation – which does indeed appear to be the case – why was he not protected? Doesn’t the fact that he was not safeguarded actually comport with the idea of a kidnapping operation? Ditto for having the February 17 Martyrs Brigade running security; releasing the Blind Sheikh is one of their goals. In fact, as Shoebat.com demonstrated in detail in Addendum H of our “Ironclad” Report, when an explosion rocked the Benghazi compound just a few months earlier on June 6, 2012, it was the Brigades of the Imprisoned Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman that was responsible, as this video clearly demonstrates (video starts at 2:35 mark to show explosion):

What must be made clear is that at the time of the Benghazi attacks, a weapons trafficking operation would have involved the following countries primarily, as demonstrated by Shoebat.com: the U.S., Turkey, Syria, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar.

However, the country with the greatest interest in kidnapping Stevens would have been Egypt, which was led at the time by the Muslim Brotherhood and president Mohammed Mursi. In fact, the protests going on outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo on the day of the attacks in Benghazi, were not about the anti-Muhammad video; they were about demanding the release of the Blind Sheikh, as reported by none other than CNN’s Nic Robertson, as Shoebat.com relayed in EXHIBIT Z. It is at least possible that there were competing agendas (use all the events of the period).

An important question that must be answered in this regard, was answered by our “Ironclad” Report. That question is: Was Egypt involved in the attacks?

The answer is unequivocally yes. Two pieces of evidence (video and document) point to Mursi himself (EXHIBIT A and B). Exhibit A is video from a cell phone in which one of the attackers that night can be heard shouting that “we were sent by Mursi”. Exhibit B is a Libyan Intelligence document that says Egyptians arrested in connection with the attack also said they were sent by Mursi.

EXHIBT A from “Ironclad”:

EXHIBIT B from “Ironclad”:

EXHIBIT B of "Ironclad" Report.

EXHIBIT B of “Ironclad” Report.

In fact, the U.S. State Department ultimately acknowledged that the Jamal Network – an Egyptian terrorist group whose leader is a deputy to Ayman al-Zawhiri – was involved. Admiral Thomas Pickering inadvertently revealed it during a congressional hearing when he thought he was alluding to his ARB’s UNCLASSIFIED report when he was actually referring to the CLASSIFIED version (See EXHIBITS AE and AF).

Mursi himself repeatedly made no bones about his desire to see the Blind Sheikh released:

Allen West appears to be spot-on with respect to Benghazi being about weapons trafficking to Turkey and on to Syria. He may be correct that there was not a kidnapping operation.

However, as we have demonstrated, the two are certainly not mutually exclusive.


, , , , , , , , , ,

  • kong1967

    I have read bits and pieces of this from different places. The account of the Egyptian military claiming they recovered documents showing that Obama gave Morsi $8 billion (if memory serves me correctly) to secure land in the desert for a certain militant group (which I don’t recall).

    Point is, these accounts are not coming from the same places. The Libyan investigation has nothing to do with what the Egyptian military found.

    It’s all too close for comfort. Obama may have been neck deep in treasonous acts against the United States.

    • enoughlies

      And those in the Senate and the House that sit idly by are complicit

      • kong1967

        But at least Gowdy is going to investigate. The left is stonewalling and Pelosi filled it with Dems that will protect Hillary. I’m sure they will be bashing and downplaying the direction of the investigation all throughout it to the media. They’re going to make it obvious they do not want us to know the truth. I just hope Gowdy doesn’t give in to political pressures from anyone…Obama, Boehner, or whoever, and goes everywhere it takes him.

  • richinnameonly

    There is so much involved with this that one can get a bit confused. If I try to keep it simple in my mind, then it makes no sense that Stevens and the compound would be attacked if both were successfully used to facilitate the weapons needs of the terrorists. When kidnapping is considered as part of the situation it makes much more sense. Everything else falls into place such as Stevens timed presence, attackers knowing his location, stand down orders, Obama not being “available”, ready made scapegoat video, backdrop of Mursi and the desire for the blind sheikh to be released, etc. If the administration wanted to do away with Stevens and traces of the operation there were much better ways to do that and not put the place under the magnifying glass, even including Obamas push for no public criticism of Islam.

  • Winston

    Why does anyone care anymore? We have already lost to the Luciferians. They’ve drained our resources. Only divine intervention can help.

    • enoughlies

      There is more at stake than our resources..under God and with God we can rebuild a Christian nation

      If as reported they were dealing in arms…dealing in drugs and dealing in child sex trafficking..we need to know and clean it up and out

  • Soxtory

    The kidnapping then swap for the blind sheik is looking more and more plausible every day. The former seals showed up on their own and threw a monkey wrench into the plan. Glen Dougherty himself is said to have killed 60 of the attacking Muslims. The arms shipping was used as the reason to get the Ambassador out and vulnerable.

    • enoughlies

      Who told those heroe’s to paint themselves…They would only have lit themselves were they told to and that help was there to save them…so who assassinated Glen Dougherty and Ty Woods?? Who set them up? Who had them murdered???

      Congress the only way to clean out this rats nest is to reveal it..Do your constitutional duty–no more BS. The people are on to you too–not just the communist–but you too.

  • Pingback: May 26, 2014 Grumpy Daily Headlines | Grumpy Opinions()

  • Pingback: Gods Hope Manifested » Blog Archive » Where Allen West Went WRONG About Benghazi()

  • gpny

    I believe that Mr. Stevens was there doing the gun running deal and also to be used to trade for the blind sheik, and I can’t help but think that our administration knew this and had no intention of saving him and the other Americans. I hope I am wrong, however, it looks as if it was everything that has been stated by Mr. Shoebat is true and worse, it possibly got out of control. Obama and the State Dept. didn’t count on those two heroic navy seals disobeying orders to stand down! How can they say they couldn’t get there in time to save them when they didn’t know how long the fighting would last? So much corruption and evil in this administration. I don’t think Obama would be impeached if he committed murder on national television. God help us all!

    • Soxtory

      If Obama and Hillary were involved in setting the Ambassador up to be kidnapped, that is treason. I think we can trust the Republicans, especially Gowdy as the chairman. When Boehner gets involved, my trust evaporates but I think Gowdy will stand for the truth till the bitter end.

    • Proudvet56

      Oh yeah. Obama is a traitor, and he will go down for it. Sad to say that there will be a lot of blood shed to do this.

  • George Blair

    Remember what was going on at the same time – specifically Syria. Now who on earth was supplying those “rebels”? Certainly not the Russians, they were backing Assad.

    Hmmmm…..who could it be who could it be?

  • Sharknado

    There needs to be a culture change in America…get back to Christ or lose America forever.

    • enoughlies


  • cheezwhizz

    IIRC, a long time ago, when Beck used to be on Fox, he had hinted that Obama ‘s people were working to release the blind WTC killer .
    I think that spooked the WH and they waited to engineer this crisis , and didn’t let it go to waste .
    It would be interesting to see the chronology of that silly youtube video which got blamed even before the attack in Benghazi was over .

  • yennikcm

    How many were at the CIA outpost? And they killed 4…..hmmmm,…I vote for the kidnapping and swap slant, along with the Illegal gun running….O is deep into the Muslim Brotherhood, with money and strategies…….Page 261 of Os book “Audacity of Hope”, reads, “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction”………O, gave rise to the Muslim Brotherhood, in 2009, Speech in Cairo..the Muslim Brotherhood was a Banned entity in Egypt, and O demanded they be represented at his speech……Look at all the Muslim Brotherhood people in Os administration, and they have Top Secret Clearances……think

  • pookieamos

    Remember how two of the four who were killed , the Navy Seals , refused to stand down and rushed to help Ambassador Stevens ? Here is what I believe . I believe there was a plan to have Stevens kidnapped to exchange him with the Blind Shiekh . This would explain why Stevens security was relaxed. I believe when the two Navy Seals showed up and began fighting that Stevens was murdered instead. Perhaps the attackers felt betrayed by Obama or whomever set it up , so they instead killed him. This makes so much sense to me. I also think gun running was taking place which would explain why Stevens was meeting with the Turkish diplomat .

  • Pingback: Obama's Arrest of The Benghazi Suspect Is A Proven Scandal | Walid ShoebatWalid Shoebat()