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:
Based on this data, the DoD Memorandum and Detainee Assessment reached the obvious conclusion: “JTF GTMO recommends detainee be Transferred to the Control of Another Country for Continued Detention (TRCD).”
This was releasing an extremely dangerous and motivated enemy of America into the custody of Muammar Gaddafi, proving that stupid decisions are not limited to Democratic administrations. Gaddafi released bin Qumu from prison in 2010 as part of a celebration of 41 years of dictatorship, a decision he soon regretted as the terrorist almost immediately became a leader of the Libyan revolution.
Far from being a spontaneous reaction to a pathetic 14-minute YouTube video, the attacks on U.S. property and personnel last week were preceded by activity that either was or should have been detected and acted upon by our intelligence agencies and the State Department.
Even without such intelligence, however, the criminal negligence of releasing a villain like bin Qumu is matched by the criminal negligence of leaving American personnel and property with utterly inadequate security across the Muslim world on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.
What’s worse, the State Department appears to have largely relied on the local police or military for protection despite a background of frighteningly frequent “green on blue” attacks in Afghanistan (which speak to the power of religious fanaticism over the responsibility of one’s uniform in that part of the world) and an Egyptian military cowed into submission by the new Muslim Brotherhood government.
The mindset that would prohibit U.S. Marines from guarding consulates in Arab countries and perhaps disallow the use of live ammunition in the skeleton private security forces assigned to these facilities is not limited to the Obama administration.
It is part of the liberal mental disease of believing that terrorists can be reformed and that the victims are to blame for their own deaths and suffering. Indeed, the story comes full circle with Wednesday’s news about bin Qumu, less than 18 months after the New York Times, this administration’s very own Правда (Pravda), during the Libyan revolution wrote an article about the very same personality-disordered drug-addicted tubercular homicidal maniac, calling him “an ally of sorts.”
It would be one thing if this particular aspect of the liberals’ disconnect with reality were mostly harmless, like their belief in man-caused climate change that to date has basically only cost us money.
But misunderstanding our enemy, an enemy absolutely bent on our destruction and willing to wait years, even centuries, to accomplish that goal, is a recipe for self-destruction. The Obama administration’s deception of itself and of the nation is a predictable but unforgiveable failure.
And it is a failure that is self-reinforcing, as its projection of weakness and gullibility encourages our enemies to attack us again.
One can only wonder whether Clinton, Rice, Carney, or the impenetrably narcissistic Obama will one day be heard sleepwalking, muttering in well-earned perpetual guilt, “Out, damn’d spot!”
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.