If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!

JIHADISTS WANTED WESTERN INTERESTS OUT OF LIBYA

by Sharon Rondeau

Emails revealed this evening by Fox News agree with many of Denise Simon’s statements and contention that the Obama regime’s explanation of an anti-Islamic video as the reason for violence in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 was a “cover-up” from the beginning.  The group Ansar Al Sharia had taken responsibility early on for the attack which killed four Americans.

(Oct. 24, 2012) — On October 20, 2012, The Post & Email published the first part of an interview with Denise Simon, a Senior Research Analyst on Domestic and Foreign Policy for Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely (Ret.), a well-known Middle East military and Middle East analyst and commentator.

Ms. Simon had written a two-part article on her observations regarding the events of September 11, 2012 which killed Amb. Christopher Stevens and four specialists working for the State Department in tracking Libyan weapons released after the fall of Muommar Gaddafi.  Simon contends that “Egypt was a massive protest on 9-11-2012; this was a militia attack of Benghazi operators” on the U.S. consulate.

Ms. Simon’s research can be found at Stand Up America, Patriots Duty and Gulag Bound.

In part 1 of our interview, Simon stated that Libya has fallen “into the hands of the jihadists” and that Iran could be influencing Libya.  Iran has been named by the United States as “the most active state sponsor of terrorism.”  Simon has also linked the violence in Libya to the civil war in Syria and found that Syria is now in possession of missiles.  She stated in part 1 that it was likely that thousands of weapons hoarded by Gaddafi had found their way to Syria by way of militant groups throughout Libya.  It is estimated that 30,000 people have been killed or are missing as a result of the upheaval there.

Prior to the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, rising violence and attempts to attack the compound had not been reported in the U.S. press.

A recent New York Times article claims that the Obama regime has been negotiating with Iran in “secret exchanges” since Obama took office, but in last night’s final presidential debate, when asked by the moderator if the story were accurate, Obama responded that it was “not true.”

The second half of our interview follows.

THE POST & EMAIL:  Obama involved the U.S. in Libya without congressional approval.  Why do you think he wanted Gaddafi removed?

MS. SIMON:  There’s a lot of speculation, and I can’t tell you for sure, except that Gaddafi was stirring the pot when it came to currency manipulation and oil.  He was selling his oil; obviously he had a lot of oil.  He didn’t want currency; he didn’t want Euros; he didn’t want the U.S. dollar; he wanted gold.  People need the oil.  So we needed to assume control of his oil revenues and exports so we could keep the value of the gold in check. The gold is worth $800 today; people are buying oil for the sake of gold, and tomorrow that gold is now worth $1,500.  So that added to Gaddafi’s wealth.

That looks like the single-plan speculation on why we wanted him removed, but I also have a deep sense that one of the other bigger reasons to have him removed was to allow the movement of The Muslim Brotherhood into Libya.  Gaddafi had kept them at bay, as Mubarak had tried to do.  We cannot dismiss that we effectively got Hosni Mubarak out of there as well.

THE POST & EMAIL:  Mubarak had been a U.S. ally, kept terrorism under control and tolerated Israel, had he not?

MS. SIMON:  He was far beyond tolerant.  He was a true protector in a lot of cases of Israel, which had to worry less about Mubarak than Ahmadinejad or any of the mullahs.

THE POST & EMAIL:  Do you think that the U.S. had a part in the Arab Spring, and if so, what role do you think this country played in it?

MS. SIMON:  By ignoring all the threats and the regime changes and not intervening in that regard and supporting a regime change in Libya and Egypt is our hand in the Arab Spring: to hand it over to The Muslim Brotherhood, and to a large extent, to Iran.  Iran is running completely unchecked now in Iraq.  So the poor decisions or lack of a decision on what was going on when it all started in Tunisia and ended up in Tahrir Square is a failure of the United States and the United Nations.  We just found out within the last two weeks that Syria, and this includes the Assad opposition forces have come into a large ownership of missiles.  If we had addressed Syria early on, as in last year, we could have saved that country, but now, we can’t do it.  Now it is completely infiltrated, and the rebels in Syria are angry at the United States because we did nothing to help them. They wanted, and in some cases still do, to be a true friend of the U.S. and the Western world; they don’t want radical Islamists or true Sharia law.  There is a Muslim Brotherhood, but it’s different there than in some of the other countries.  They wanted to be in charge of their own destiny and would have accepted Israel.  But we’ve done nothing, so they have to fold in with somebody for the sake of “We’re going to get our country back and use whoever we can.”

I can’t eliminate the Gulf States, who were very late to this party as well.  They didn’t care about the Syrians, either.  Russia wants Syria; Iran wants Syria.  North Korea wants Syria.  We have all of the countries that don’t like us and they’re all posturing their power and force in Syria on both sides.

THE POST & EMAIL:  Who do you think will end up taking over Syria?  Are we supplying them with anything that you know of?

MS. SIMON:  We’re allegedly told that we are supplying them with “non-lethal” supplies.  After reading through a lot of open-source material, I have a deep sense that we are giving them weapons, but we’re doing it through the Gulf States, meaning Qatar; France, Jordan and Turkey.  But the bigger fallout is this:  tens of thousands of people have left Syria.  Where have they gone?  They’ve gone to Lebanon; they’ve gone to Jordan and Turkey.  We found out recently that there are an estimated 30,000 people missing.  Also, Turkey has called for our formal intervention in Syria, which is due to Qaddafi weapons being in fact shipped to Turkey that make their way to Syrian factions, mostly AQ types.

[Editor’s Note:  Fox News and The Washington Post have reported within the last week that “the Obama administration has participated in the creation of an arms pipeline to Al Qaeda in Syria…a “Fast & Furious” program that is running Saudi and Qatari weapons to our terrorist enemies in the Middle East, and Joe Biden lied about it in the [vice-presidential] debate.”]

Jordan is likely to fall under this pressure.  What does this look like in the next 2-3 years?  Do we have to go through nation-building in Syria if Assad is removed?  Do we have to do nation-building in Jordan should it fall?  We are not gaining anything.  The forecast of this is grimmer today for the United States than it was before.

THE POST & EMAIL:  So you do not call the Arab Spring a success?

MS. SIMON:  There is zero success in the Arab Spring:  zero.  Look at the guy who’s taken over Libya:  Magarief.  Gaddafi hated him and tried to have him killed.  He came to the United States and was here for 30 years.  “OK, we’ve made good friends with him; we’ve recognized him.  Gaddafi’s gone, so you can go back into Libya now and handle things.”  But he can’t handle them.  There are numerous militia groups, and he’s bought them.  With the whole thing happening in Benghazi, he’s saying, “We’ll work to get rid of them.  We’ll throw all of these militias out.”  But they haven’t been thrown out.

[Editor’s Note:  A September 13, 2011 article in the UK Daily Mail reported that the interim Libyan government at the time had declared that “Sharia law” would become the basis to “guide the country” after Gaddafi was deposed.]

THE POST & EMAIL:  The Libyan president said that Benghazi was a terrorist attack almost right away while Obama and his regime were blaming an internet video.  He said it was “planned.”

MS. SIMON:  The video was used for damage control and nothing more.  That was a plot.  There are thousands of anti-Muslim videos on the internet.  It’s the cover-up afterward…and the death of four Americans.  I think there’s a deeper, deeper cover-up here, and that’s really the thing that bothers me.  I can’t get to it:  was the cover-up actually that we were going to turn Libya over to The Muslim Brotherhood? Was it the cover-up of who’s working for whom?  Was it the cover-up that nobody is wanting any kind of diplomatic objective on Libya?  That’s where I am.  Why would Hillary take responsibility for the failure of the State Department?  It’s not her style to do that.

[Editor’s Note:  After more than two weeks, the Obama regime admitted that the Benghazi attack was the work of terrorists, which the CIA station chief in Libya had reportedly asserted  within 24 hours of the event.  However, on October 21, the day before the last presidential debate, a new story quoting an unnamed “U.S. intelligence official” was reported by several mainstream media outlets which combined the video and militants but “no planning” as the cause of the attack.  Several different explanations have been offered since September 11, the day of the attack on the U.S. consulate.

Following the October 10 hearing, the House Oversight Committee released cables sent by U.S. embassy staff in Tripoli, including those signed by the late Amb. Stevens, which indicated rising extremism and danger in Libya over the prior year with requests for increased security.]  Additional documentation was released by the committee late last week.

An individual who escaped from Libya and was traveling to Syria following the September 11 attack in Benghazi has admitted to being a member of “violent extremist networks” and is being held in Turkey.]

THE POST & EMAIL:  I recall that Lt. Col. Andrew Wood testified on October 10 to the House Oversight Committee that between 10,000 and 20,000 manpads had been released once Gaddafi fell and that he was compelled to speak even if it were at his own peril.

MS. SIMON:  That’s because (Rep.) Dennis Kucinich asked the question, and then Col. Wood responded.  Then Eric Nordstrom said that “the Taliban is inside the building.”

THE POST & EMAIL:  What do you think Nordstrom meant by that?

MS. SIMON:  Inside the State Department.

THE POST & EMAIL:  Do you think that Nordstrom was saying that there are people inside the State Department working with The Muslim Brotherhood against the United States?

MS. SIMON:  They are.  They clearly are.  We have three Muslim Brotherhood members working in the White House; there are Muslim Brotherhood inside the State Department; there are Muslim Brotherhood working in the Department of Defense.  There is no denial of that; it is absolutely a fact.  The problem is that it all comes down to Muslim sensibilities.  The other thing that was revealed in that congressional testimony is that we were the last flag standing.  That tells you that everybody else felt that “This isn’t worth our treasure and time; we’re getting out of Libya.”  But the United States said, “No, we’re good; we’re going to stay here,” and we are, in fact, the last flag standing.

The sad part about that is that we didn’t have any true security.  Blue Mountain, the contracting company that was supposed to supply security, did what they were told to do in the letter of the contract.  But it tells us that the people who were assigned by Blue Mountain in Benghazi were nothing more than Wal-Mart greeters.  They had no weapons.  They provided only building maintenance, if you will, and transportation; they were drivers.  They were paid less than $5.00/hour.

THE POST & EMAIL:  Why do you think the State Department agreed to such an arrangement?

MS. SIMON:  Because we don’t want to offend any of the Muslims.  We don’t want to put a flag out there; we don’t want to have armed security people saying to the Libyans or anyone else in the Middle East that “We are offended” and “We feel we are a threat by any outside force.”  So we don’t have the Marines here; we’re not walking around with M-16s and other weapons.

THE POST & EMAIL:  Even though they may have been needed?

MS. SIMON:  There’s no question they were needed.  The entire year’s-worth of events in Libya tells us that they were needed.  Not only did we need Marines’ we probably needed a lot more humans on the ground.

THE POST & EMAIL:  Do you think Amb. Stevens was aware that security was kept “artificially low” purposely?  Might he have thought that there was something strange about his being denied additional security?

MS. SIMON:   Amb. Stevens had a long career working in the Middle East.  He had made some good contacts and good friends.  I think he was particularly chosen to be the ambassador there because of those contacts.  They were good contacts in his world and the Obama world, but they weren’t good contacts for the safety and the trust of the United States having a footprint in the Middle East, certainly in Libya.

I listened to an interview that he had given to some people in the press about a year ago, and he was very up-front, very articulate, very well-versed, very insightful, and very current.  But personally, I think he was on a fool’s mission thinking that they could deal diplomatically with coffee and crumpets at the table and make nice with these people.  Clearly, that is what the Obama administration thinks they can do, and it hasn’t worked.  We’ve extended the olive branch by the tonnage, and it hasn’t gotten us anywhere because this administration is not being honest about what an Islamic Caliphate wants.  They all hate us, and we cannot get by that.  So the rules of engagement, whether it be at the ambassador level or the lower levels, have all been altered up.  Let’s all play “nice-nice.”  He tried that with Ahmadinejad several times, and Ahmadinejad is laughing at us.

THE POST & EMAIL:  In the vice-residential debate, Joe Biden said that Iran is not close to being able to deliver a nuclear weapon…but why does he want to wait?

MS. SIMON:  It’s not only “Why wait?”  It goes much deeper than that.  Joe Biden clearly has not paid any attention to any of the IAEA reports.  They have enough fissure material; they already have enough weaponized systems.  The thing now is having more quantity for more weaponized systems.  Israel would not take all the proactive measures they have taken to stop and slow down Iran if it weren’t an imminent threat, “imminent” meaning days, months or weeks.  Israel wasn’t going to tolerate that same kind of agenda in Syria and Israel bombed their nuclear facility.  They’re just not going to do that.

There are other countries over there that we’re not paying enough attention to, but Israel is.  One is Kuwait, and one is Azerbaijan.  The UAE.  If we do the right thing with theses countries and show force, they will bend and come over to our side.  But right now, that’s not the case.  What Israel is doing certainly is for Israel, but not only for Israel.

THE POST & EMAIL:  Do you think there is anything else underlying the Obama regime’s approach to the Middle East?

MS. SIMON:  If you look at The Muslim Brotherhood history here in the United States, they actually came in to the U.S. in the 1960s and established an office and a presence in Chicago.  If you look at who in Chicago – and you can look at some of the players in the Chicago Commerce Clause – if you look at some of the people and some of the deals that have been cut by Mayor Daley and all of the other people – let’s face it:  Gaddafi had business deals with Louis Farrakhan.  So this tells you that they have some deep loyalty or they are marching to certain orders demanded of them by The Muslim Brotherhood.  I think now at this point, for their own safety, they have to appease every demand of The Muslim Brotherhood, whether they like it or not.  The Arab footprint in Chicago and Illinois is massive; it’s actually much worse than it is in Michigan.  I think there is a very long history of that.

THE POST & EMAIL:  How about Obama’s apparent sympathy with the Muslim world?

MS. SIMON:  Not only is he sympathetic; he is pro-agenda.  There are too many indicators.  When you take out any reference to Islam or the Muslim faith from training materials that the FBI uses; the fact that we have changed the Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan; the fact that Lt. Col. Matthew Dooley was removed from the Joint Forces Staff College for teaching an Islamic course that he didn’t design…that was not his syllabus; that syllabus was there before he got there.  So what has happened is that this entire administration, including Dempsey, including Panetta, including and Hillary and the National Security Council – they have all become overly sensitive, to the point most recently that we bought a $70,000 ad that both Hillary and Obama were in and played it in Pakistan saying that we embrace all faiths and that’s what America was founded on…

THE POST & EMAIL:  Who paid for that?

MS. SIMON:  The taxpayers.  Another thing that is a topic for another day is that this administration continues to support the Palestinians, which is another problem.  I would also submit the name “Samantha Power.”  Samantha Power is completely anti-Israel and works as a senior staff person for the National Security Council.  She was part of the Obama transition team and the Obama 2008 campaign and is still there.  She’s married to Cass Sunstein.

THE POST & EMAIL:  Do you think that Ambassador Stevens and the other three were specifically targeted for murder?

MS. SIMON:  I don’t think that they were targeted, but I think their objective, their mission was what was targeted as well as to get the United States out of Libya.  If you look at how many attacks we have had in Libya just in the last year, it was sending a clear message:  “All you Westerners, including Britain, get out, including the Red Cross.”  I did mention in my piece that Sean Smith – and Hillary was the one who actually pointed this out to me when she gave that talk in front of the four flag-draped caskets – was a gamer.  In the gaming world, after 9/11 and when we decided that we weren’t going to get caught any more in this, he found out at the end of the Clinton administration that there was a massive wall between the FBI and the CIA.  So he had to work not only to take down that wall, but we also had very antiquated systems.  That’s the reason that we ended up with the Patriot Act; that’s the reason that we ended up with a lot of the technology that they had to employ to start scratching this nonsense.  Once the NSA was going to the telecommunications companies and working with them to track all cell phone traffic, email traffic, and text traffic back to the U.S. so we could analyze it, don’t think that our enemies didn’t know that.  So what did they do?  They all altered their communications methods.  They all went back to couriers, carrier pigeons, and thumb drives.  They also would pass out a password and craft an email, but they would never click on the email to send it; it would always sit there in a draft.  So it never flew across the email corridor.  Then, these people could and sign in and go look at that draft.

The other piece is this:  they started using video games because they can say and operate and type and play true jihad going completely unfettered and unchecked in the gaming world.  You can hide documents in those.  So when Hillary said that Sean Smith was a gamer, I knew immediately what he was doing.  Now we have a problem.  In the last two or three years we’ve had a massive problem that we want to address:  cyber security, because we’re in a cyber war.  We have people working in those gaming rooms to find out whatever we can.  We’re in an information vortex; we don’t have enough analysts.  We don’t have enough people connecting all of the dots to come up with a true conclusion and hand it off to the CIA top guy so they can put it in an PED.

THE POST & EMAIL:  But Sean Smith was one of them?

MS. SIMON:  Absolutely.  Going back to your question, I truly believe that the jihadists – the Ansar al-Sharia, the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, the Rahman Brigade – knew that they were being tracked.  So was Amb. Stevens the target?  I don’t think that he was specifically the target; it could have been anyone.  The target was “We don’t want you watching us anymore.  We don’t want you to know where these weapons are going.  We don’t want you to know who of us has these weapons.

THE POST & EMAIL:  “We want you to leave.”

MS. SIMON:  Exactly right.  We were the last people there, and we broadcasted our presence, but we didn’t put any security there.  We did not have enough human intelligence on the ground.  We may have had it in Tripoli, but we didn’t have it in Benghazi.

THE POST & EMAIL:  We may not have it in other parts of the world where Americans are.

MS. SIMON:  We certainly don’t have it in Pakistan.

—————————–

Editor’s Note:  Ms. Simon told us that she often works ten hours a day for Stand Up America.  “In doing so, I come across a lot of things where I start seeing a pattern and where dots need to be connected.  The real watch-point for me to write the two pieces on Benghazi was when Hillary spoke about Sean Smith being a gamer.  That’s what set me off.  I said, ‘There’s way, way too much to this not to dig in to it,'” she said.  “It’s a bigger thing than just blaming it on a video and having this administration lie to us.  They can lie to us, but what are the lies truly covering up?  I’m just trying to get some clues about what they’re covering up, but I don’t think I’ve hit it all.”

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.