News of the Guantanamo-Benghazi connection is leaving Obama & Co. without excuses — unless it wants to blame Bush.
On Wednesday afternoon, Fox News reported “developing” news that Sufyan bin Qumu (full name Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed Hamuda Bin Qumu ), a terrorist who was released from Guantanamo Bay to the Libyan government, may have been actively involved in, or perhaps the leader of, the assault on America’s consulate in Benghazi that killed our ambassador and three other American personnel.
The release of bin Qumu, who goes by many aliases, was made in 2007, during the George W. Bush administration.
Fox News also reported on Wednesday that it obtained a Department of Homeland Security intelligence report “showing that two days before the deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya, a statement incited ‘sons of Egypt’ to pressure America to release the so-called blind sheikh ‘even if it requires burning the embassy down with everyone in it.’”
The administration’s ongoing assertion that the violence was only about a juvenile film trailer, and that it did not represent an attack on America for some other reason, is rapidly falling apart.
It was a sign either of narcissism or incompetence (most likely both) for the administration to have doubled down on such an unlikely claim, but then if it said anything else it would mean even greater culpability than the administration would already have (simply for leaving our people inadequately guarded on 9/11).
If these stories turn out to be true, it could — and should — be a politically fatal blow to this administration’s entire senior foreign policy staff, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and UN Ambassador Susan Rice, as well as Obama’s Press Secretary Jay Carney. Our Teflon president, strutting around calling Mitt Romney “new” to foreign affairs and talking about what he’s learned in his few years in office, will likely escape serious criticism by the media.
This despite that in his call with the terrorist-sympathizing president of Egypt, Obama “said that he rejects efforts to denigrate Islam, but underscored that there is never any justification for violence against innocents.” A normal human being, not to mention the president of the United States, would have emphasized the latter point first and made the second point a minor afterthought if mentioning it at all.
While Fox News reports that this is new information, other sources have suggested bin Qumu and the Ansar al-Sharia militant group as leading suspects behind the attack for several days. (See here, here, and here.)
Reading through the 2005 Department of Defense report on bin Qumu (which appears to have been scheduled to remain classified until the year 2030) is like a trip through an Alice in Wonderland version of national security. Some highlights include:
More highlights, “based solely on the detainee’s statements”:
Bin Qumu was transferred to Guantanamo because he was believed to be a valuable source of information on the Al-Wafa Organization, its operations and officials, and its relationship with al Qaeda.
Among the Department of Defense’s “reasons for continued detention” were:
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?