Category Archives: Treasury

WikiLeaks Posts the Hacked Emails of CIA Director

Posted on by

Yet another Obama administration placeholder that was using a private email for sensitive material.

Of particular note is the partially written summary on Iran from 2009, which appear to be the genesis and words the White House used to justify normalizing relations with the rogue nation. John Brennan was applying to obtain high security clearance to enter the Obama White House before 2009 and later assuming the role of the chief of the CIA.

*** “The United States has no choice but to find ways to coexist — and to come to terms — with whatever government holds power in Tehran,” Brennan said in the three-page memo. He added that Iran would have to “come to terms” with the U.S. and that “Tehran’s ability to advance its political and economic interests rests on a non-hostile relationship with the United States and the West.”

In the memo, Brennan advised Obama to “tone down” rhetoric with Iran, and swiped at former President George W. Bush for his “gratuitous” labeling of Iran as part of a worldwide “axis of evil.” Brennan also said the U.S. should establish a direct dialogue with Tehran and “seek realistic, measurable steps.” Although he didn’t specifically call for the regime of financial sanctions that the Obama administration, along with Europe, Russia and China, pushed against Iran, Brennan told the president-elect to “hold out meaningful carrots as well as sticks.” ***

In part, a deeper look at the text is as follows:

The Conundrum of Iran

Iran will be a major player on the world stage in the decades ahead, and its actions and
behavior will have a major and enduring impact on near- and long-term U.S. interests on
a wide variety of regional and global issues. With a population of over 70 million, xx
percent of the world’s proven oil reserves, a geostrategic location of tremendous
(enviable?) significance, and a demonstrated potential to develop a nuclear-weapons
program, the United States has no choice but to find a way to coexist—and to come to
terms—with whatever government holds power in Tehran. At the same time, the Iranian
Government also must come to terms with Washington, as Tehran’s ability to advance its
political and economic interests rests on a non-hostile relationship with the United States
and the West.
There are numerous hurdles that stand in the way of improved U.S.-Iranian relations, but
none is more daunting than the theocratic regime’s nearly 30-year track record of
engaging in transnational terrorism, both directly and indirectly, to advance its
revolutionary agenda. Tehran’s proclivity to promote its interests by playing the terrorist
card undermines its standing as a responsible sovereign state and calls into question
virtually all of its actions, even when pursuing legitimate political, economic, and
strategic interests. While the use of terrorism(*footnote on definition) is reprehensible
and of serious concern irrespective of the source, the wielding of the terrorism club by a
nation state such as Iran is particularly alarming and insidious because of the ability of a
government to use its instruments of national power to support, conceal, facilitate, and
employ terrorist violence. Specifically, a sovereign government has the ready ability to
provide all of the logistical requirements—e.g. the fabrication of official documentation,
explosives, and weapons; the protected use of diplomatic facilities, staff, and pouches;
and the provision of expertise, funding, and targeting intelligence—that can be used to
great effect to plan and carry out successful terrorist attacks. Too often, and for too long,
Iran has excelled at such activities.

An anonymous teen hacker claimed to have stolen a handful of files from CIA Director John Brennan’s private email account, U.S. officials reported on Monday.

CIA Director John Brennan emails

Today, 21 October 2015 and over the coming days WikiLeaks is releasing documents from one of CIA chief John Brennan’s non-government email accounts. Brennan used the account occasionally for several intelligence related projects.

John Brennan became the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency in March 2013, replacing General David Petraeus who was forced to step down after becoming embroiled in a classified information mishandling scandal. Brennan was made Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism on the commencement of the Obama presidency in 2009–a position he held until taking up his role as CIA chief.

According to the CIA Brennan previously worked for the agency for a 25 year stretch, from 1980 to 2005.

Brennan went private in 2005-2008, founding an intelligence and analysis firm The Analysis Corp (TAC). In 2008 Brennan became a donor to Obama. The same year TAC, led by Brennan, became a security advisor to the Obama campaign and later that year to the Obama-Biden Transition Project. It is during this period many of the Obama administration’s key strategic policies to China, Iran and “Af-Pak” were formulated. When Obama and Biden entered into power, Brennan was lifted up on high, resulting in his subsequent high-level national security appointments.

If you have similar official documents that have not been published yet, send them to WikiLeaks.

John Brennan Draft SF86

“National Security Position” form for John Brennan. This form, filled out by Brennan himself before he assumed his current position, reveals a quite comprehensive social graph of the current Director of the CIA with a lot of additional non-govermental and professional/military career details. (17 November 2008, Author: John Brennan)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

The Analysis Corporation

FAX from the General Counsel of the CIA to the Goverment Accountability Office about a legal quarrel between the CIA and “The Analysis Corporation”. TAC seems to have lost a tender for a US watchlist-related software project to a competitor. Issues seem to revolve around “growth of historical data” and “real-time responsiveness” of the system. (15 February 2008, Sender: CIA, Office of General Counsel, Larry Passar)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

Draft: Intel Position Paper

Challenges for the US Intelligence Community in a post cold-war and post-9/11 world; a calling for inter-agency cooperation, a ten-year term for the Director of the CIA and the Director of National Intelligence. It also demands the autonomy of the Intelligence Community, that it “… must never be subject to political manipulation and interference.” An unfinished paragraph is titled “Damaging Leaks of Classified Information”. (15 July 2007, Author: John Brennan)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

The Conundrum of Iran

Recommendations to the next President (assuming office in Jan. 2009) on how to play the figures on the U.S.-Iranian Chessboard (18 November 2007, Author: John Brennan)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

Torture

Letter from Vice Chairman Bond, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, to his fellow board members with a proposal on how to make future interrogation methods “compliant” and “legal”. Instead of listing all allowed methods, every kind of interrogation should be considered compliant, as long as it is not explicitly forbidden by the “Army Field Manual” (AFM). (May 2008)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

Torture Ways

A bill from July 2008 called “Limitations on Interrogation Techniques Act of 2008” explicitly list the forbidden interrogation techniques mentioned in the previous document and can be considered a direct implementation of the recommendations of Christopher Bond. (31 July 2008)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

Sheik of Terror Protected by Qatar, White House Approves

Posted on by

 Al-Qaradawi’s popularity among the Sunnis has grown because of the massive use he makes of electronic media, mainly television and the Internet. One of his most important tools is the Al-Jazeera TV channel, which broadcasts his popular program “Life and Islamic Law,” viewed by tens of millions of Muslims.
Al-Qaradawi has often exploited the program for blatant anti-Semitic propaganda and incitement (see below). He was also one of the founders of the IslamOnline website in 1997, which often quotes him.
Al-Qaradawi refers to his religious views as “moderate Islam,” which seeks to balance intellect and emotion. He has positive attitudes toward reforms in Islam, which he calls “correcting perceptions which were corrupted.” He is considered one of the foremost propounders of the doctrine of the “the law of the Muslim minorities,” which provides the Muslim minorities around the globe with space in which to maneuver and compromise between their daily lives and Islamic law. The aim of implementing his doctrine is to unite and unify Muslim minorities to make it possible for them to live under non-Muslim regimes, until the final stage of spreading Islam to the entire world.
At the same time, building a bridge between the exigencies of Muslim emigrants’ daily lives and Islamic religious law also includes regarding taking over Europe as Islam’s next target. In 2003 al-Qaradawi issued a fatwa declaring that “Islam will return to Europe as a victorious conqueror after having been expelled twice. This time it will not be conquest by the sword, but by preaching and spreading [Islamic] ideology…The future belongs to Islam…The spread of Islam until it conquers the entire world and includes the both East and West marks the beginning of the return of the Islamic Caliphate…”

The ‘go-to’ country in the Middle East for Barack Obama, Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry has been Qatar. al Qaradawi, a major leader of the Muslim Brotherhood is not on the U.S. terror list due in part to Qatar for intervening but he is on the United Arab Emirates list.

Sheik Yusuf al Qaradawi is the Theologian of Terror. The document is here.

He operates freely in Qatar as does the Taliban 5 that Barack Obama released from Guantanamo in exchange for Army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl.

For a full and terrifying background, there are several WikiLeaks cables proving his global Muslim Brotherhood ties and fatwas.

The threats al Qaradawi makes to Egypt began at least in 2008 where the Iranian Shiite Imperialism will reign in Egypt. The threats continued in 2013 where Qaradawi called on Muslims worldwide to wage jihad in Egypt.

(Per raw translation, including words that don’t translate well into English:)

Al-Qaradawi when he praises Allah of low turnout in elections by $ 600,000 «concert» included 15 country-led and 200 members of «terrorist» festive, however, overturned on Al-Qaradawi, the reaction to the terrorist group, reprimand for failing to support their candidates from either party, or other, despite many Community financial support during the past few days in support of a number of candidates who were supporters of the terrorist group.

The sources said that businessman brothers is guaranteed by “alazomh” which cost nearly $ 600,000, where attendees were distributed Hidayat also represented in “gold coins”, explaining that the celebratory “gloating” also saw the closed meetings between his brother, the leadership and representatives of the Government and the country’s security apparatus, Qaradawi asked to celebrate a few Egyptians vote turnout in the elections to Qatar to increase funding for the terrorist group in Egypt, located on its territory.

Qaradawi of Qatar requested the necessary amount estimated at about 5 million dollars under the pretext of revival demonstrations community again in Egypt, and Egyptian embassies in several countries as a kind of pressure on the current system of compensation for the failure of the community to introduce her supporters in the first almerglh of Parliament, until the country’s leaders responded to the brothers, said: “getkm disappointment. Glad no.. Da mafeesh and don’t sell you candidate got the votes guaranteed win “.

The sources confirmed that the country refused to provide any support during that period only after establishing a clear vision and an action plan during the coming period both inside or outside Egypt, to embarrass Egypt in any way, Al-Qaradawi has responded that it already during these days, and that he agreed with the characters of foreign nationals to assist them in the development of such a scheme.

Pakistan Terror Cells and Nuclear Weapons, the Nightmare

Posted on by

What is at issue with Pakistan? India, Khorasan or Islamic State or all of that and more?

Under the Bush administration, the U.S. paid $100 million to secure Pakistan’ nuclear weapons. This included materials, warheads and laboratories. The full details are here. The big question now is how will Obama handle the new demands of Pakistan and their ultimatums?

Pakistan to tell U.S. it won’t accept limits on tactical nuclear arms

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) – Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif will tell U.S. President Barack Obama this week that Islamabad will not accept limits on its use of small tactical nuclear weapons, Pakistani officials said on Wednesday.

Pakistan insists smaller weapons would deter a sudden attack by its bigger neighbor India. But the United States worries tactical weapons may further destabilize an already volatile region because their smaller size makes them more tempting to use in a conventional war.

Sharif and Obama are due to meet on Thursday.

The United States wants Pakistan to commit to not using tactical nuclear weapons but Islamabad wants to keep its options open as a way of deterring a potential Indian attack, said Maria Sultan, head of the South Asian Strategic Stability Institute. More here.

Nightmare: Pakistan To Deploy Small Tactical Nuclear Weapons

Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is coming to the United States next week on an official visit, and the New York Times reports that ahead of the visit the Obama administration is holding talks with Pakistani officials about Pakistan’s plan to deploy a small tactical nuclear weapon which would be more difficult to monitor and secure than Pakistan’s arsenal of larger weapons. According to Home Land Security News Wire, the White House has not yet commented on the issue. Experts doubt Pakistan would agree to any limits on its nuclear arsenal. “If Pakistan would take the actions requested by the United States, it would essentially amount to recognition of rehabilitation and would essentially amount to parole,” George Perkovich, vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told the Times.

“I think it’s worth a try,” Perkovich added. “But I have my doubts that the Pakistanis are capable of doing this.” Other officials and outside experts said the main component of the proposed deal would be the loosening of strict controls imposed on Pakistan by the Nuclear Suppliers Group, an affiliation of nations that try to control the creation of weapons. The Times reports that the Bush administration spent as much as $100 million on a secret program to help secure Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, helping with physical security and the training of Pakistani security personnel. Those efforts continued in the Obama years. Administration officials have told Congress that most of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is under good safeguards, with warheads separated from delivery vehicles and a series of measures in place to guard against unauthorized use. These officials fear, however, the smaller weapons are easier to steal, or would be easier to use should they fall into the hands of a rogue commander.

The nightmare:

In part from CTC: In March 2014, nine members of al-Qa`ida, who were active with the group in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, defected to the group that now calls itself the “Islamic State.”[1] The defections took place months before the Islamic State formally announced its Caliphate and at that time little public attention was given to the shift in allegiances of those al-Qa`ida men, despite one of them being the brother of famed jihadi ideologue Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi.[2] The defections, at the time, seemed more like an outlier, but in hindsight they were an early sign of broader developments affecting Afghanistan’s and Pakistan’s militant landscapes. The Islamic State’s formal declaration of its “Khorasan” chapter in January 2015 is another indicator of the changes that are taking place. These changes are being pushed by what currently appears to be a fairly loosely configured, but noteworthy, network of groups and individuals who are trying to alter the direction of South and Central Asia’s multiple jihads.


A useful starting point are those individuals and groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan who have publicly pledged bay`a to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the Islamic State’s self-described “Caliph,” and whose pledge has been officially recognized by the Islamic State. The individual appointed in January 2015 as ISK’s leader is Hafiz Khan Saeed, a former Tehrik-i-Taliban (TTP) commander responsible for that group’s operations in Orakzai, an agency in Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) that is very close to the important city of Peshawar.[4] After the death of Hakimullah Mehsud, Khan Saeed was also considered a front-runner–along with Maulana Fazlullah, then the TTP head for Malakand–to replace the deceased TTP leader. Fazlullah, as is well known, won out and assumed the TTP’s leadership position in November 2013. Close to one year later, in October 2014, Khan Saeed and four other prominent TTP commanders, as well as the group’s main spokesman, Shahidullah Shahid, left TTP and pledged their allegiance to the Islamic State.

The other commanders who did so at the time were “Hafiz Quran Daulat, TTP chief in Kurram Agency; Gul Zaman, TTP chief in Khyber Agency; Mufti Hassan, TTP chief in Peshawar; and Khalid Mansoor, the TTP chief in the Hangu district.”[5] These were significant losses for the TTP, and a win for the Islamic State, as in one fell swoop al-Baghdadi’s group gained the allegiance of the individuals the TTP had designated to control the central FATA, a strategic block of land that stretches from the settled city of Peshawar to the Khyber pass and the immediate areas surrounding it.

Then on January 10, 2015, presaging things to come, these six individuals appeared in a video where they again pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. This time they were also joined by an expanded network of individuals, all of whom pledged bay`a to the Islamic State’s leader. This group included Saad Emirati, a former Taliban commander allegedly active in Afghanistan’s Logar Province; Ubaidah al-Peshwari, leader of the al-Tawhid and Jihad Group in Peshawar; the Deputy to Sheikh Abd al-Qadir al-Khorasani;[6] Sheikh Muhsin, a commander from Afghanistan’s Kunar province; Talha, a commander from Lakki Marwat; and Omar al-Mansur, from Pakistan’s infamous Lal Masjid (Red Mosque).[7]

According to the statement, an even broader network of groups–which ranges from the Qambar Khel tribe in Khyber and the Hudhayfah group in Dir to Qari Harun’s group in Kunar province–have also pledged their support for Hafiz Khan Saeed and his position as the Amir of the mujahideen of Khorasan.[8] Less than one week after the release of the video, the ranks of Khan Saeed’s group in Pakistan were also bolstered by “50 hardcore militants of the Amr Bil Maroof group, led by Commanders Haya Khan and Waheed Khan,” from Khyber joining.[9] Then on January 26 the Islamic State’s spokesman, Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, released a statement in which he formally announced the creation of ISK with Hafiz Khan Saeed serving as its leader. Unfortunately, despite these pronouncements and recent arrests of several alleged Islamic State members in Lahore, and the death of another one in Karachi, not much is known about ISK’s activities in Pakistan or its capabilities.[10] The same can be said for the linkages between ISK elements in Pakistan and the Islamic State, as well as South Asian foreign fighters who are operating on behalf of al-Baghdadi’s group in Syria and Iraq.

 

The Assignment of the CIA Annex in Benghazi

Posted on by

We keep asking what the CIA annex was actually tasked with doing in Benghazi. It was nothing nefarious but more to control what Hillary and her team were doing. Remember, the CIA is subservient to the White House and State Department. The Hillary-Benghazi testimony on Thursday is not about emails or the server. That track has already been established. The thrust of the questions will center on exactly what Hillary’s State Department intended to do about Libya after Qaddafi. Questions will be about mission pieces coming into play and being installed for deposing Qaddafi with regard to buying back weapons and buying others that were NOT bound for Syria but for the Transnational Council to take over the Qaddafi regime with particular emphasis on Tripoli and Benghazi. As noted from Politico below, this is the posture taken by Gowdy as his team.

Politico: The seven GOP members of the panel aim to strike the right balance during Thursday’s hearing with the former secretary of state. They’re hoping a professional approach, coupled with tough questions about security in Libya, U.S. foreign policy under Clinton and her email practices will help put to rest accusations that they’re ideologues bent on hurting the Democratic front-runner in the polls — or that the panel is a waste of taxpayer money. The hearing, which could last, sources say, until 8 p.m. or 9 p.m., will delve into U.S. policy toward Libya under Clinton, who encouraged U.S. support of the rebels fighting Qadhafi. Republicans want to know what the goal of that policy was and whether she was trying to make Libya a centerpiece of her foreign policy.

Gowdy said he’s particularly interested in asking Clinton about “the increase in violence juxtaposed with the decrease in security” at the mission that was attacked, because “it’s counterintuitive.”

A 1999 report after the East African embassy bombings recommended that the secretary of state take a “personal and active role” in security issues, Republicans — including Gowdy — have noted. Clinton, however, has testified previously that she was not aware of Stevens’ requests for more protection. And while it’s unclear whether the panel has any evidence suggesting that she was, Gowdy says there’s still the issue of “why” those pleas for help didn’t reach her.

When it comes to the machinery that Hillary’s team, it does involve weapons and the contracts and routes they took to reach the destination of Libya, all while doing so against rules and sanctions. Hillary may be actually guilty of much more than we can begin to define.

*** The facts begin to surface:

Washington Times – Tuesday, October 20, 2015
The State Department initially approved a weapons shipment from a California company to Libyans seeking to oust Moammar Gadhafi in 2011 even though a United Nations arms ban was in place, according to memos recovered from the burned-out compound in Benghazi.

The documents, obtained by The Washington Times, show U.S. diplomats at the Benghazi compound were keeping track of several potential U.S.-sanctioned shipments to allies, one or more of which were destined for the Transitional National Council, the Libyan movement that was seeking to oust Gadhafi and form a new government. At least one of those shipments, kept in a file marked “arms deal,” was supposed to come from Dolarian Capital Inc. of Fresno, California, according to an end use certificate from the State Department’s office of defense trade controls licensing that was contained in the file.
The shipment was to include rocket launchers, grenade launchers, 7,000 machine guns and 8 million rounds of ammunition, much of it new and inexpensive hardware originally produced in the former Soviet bloc of Eastern Europe, according to an itemized list included in the end use certificate.

Dolarian Capital, part of a small network of U.S. arms merchants that has worked with U.S. intelligence, confirmed one of its licensing requests to ship weapons via Kuwait to Libya was approved by the State Department in spring 2011 and then inexplicably revoked before the armaments were sent. “Dolarian Capital submitted the end user certificate in question to the U.S. Department of State for review and issuance of a license to transfer the arms and ammunition to Libya. The U.S. Department of State responded with a approval, which was revoked shortly thereafter,” one of its attorneys said in a statement issued to The Washington Times. “As a result no arms or ammunition was shipped or delivered to Libya under the end user certificate.”

Nonetheless, the existence of the documents and the temporary approval of at least one U.S. arms shipment provides the most direct evidence that Hillary Rodham Clinton’s State Department was aware of efforts to get weapons into the hands of rebels seeking to oust Gadhafi.

Mrs. Clinton is set to testify Thursday during a highly anticipated appearance before the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

The Obama administration has been ambiguous about the exact role the United States played in arming the rebels who overthrew Gadhafi, even as arms merchants and former CIA officials have stated publicly that a covert program facilitated such weapons transfers through a network of friendly weapons brokers and third-party countries.

The issue is sensitive because a U.N. ban on weapons shipments to Libya was in place at the time, although the State Department had the authority to deem a specific shipment in the United States interest and permit its transference, officials said.

State Department spokesman Alec Gerlach declined to comment Tuesday, as did the CIA public affairs office.

To date, the public evidence of U.S. involvement in weapons trafficking to Libya has been episodic.

Reuters reported in 2011 that President Obama signed a special presidential directive that authorized covert U.S. action to destabilize Gadhafi and stand up a new regime, up to and including facilitating weapons transfers if it was deemed in the U.S. interest.

The New York Times, quoting anonymous officials, reported a year later that the Obama administration gave its secret blessing to some weapons shipments to Libyan rebels routed through Qatar during the height of the country’s revolution.

Fox News this summer quoted a former CIA official as providing testimony in a court case that the U.S. almost certainly ran a covert weapons operation to help arm the Libyan rebels.
But to date, no evidence has emerged publicly that the State Department had direct knowledge or involvement in reviewing potential shipments.

The Benghazi documents, however, show that U.S. diplomats in the consulate were monitoring a series of potential exports in spring and summer 2011 to third-party countries and that one or more were likely to land in Libya.

For instance, a June 28, 2011, email chain contained in a file titled “arms deal” documents an exchange among State Department employees about eight export licensing application numbers, indicating one or more of the shipments involved Libya’s Transitional National Council.

“DRL recommends BA L181-11 T6-F RWA — need decision from higher level on TNC,” reads one of the notations in the email.

DRL stands for the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, and TNC is the interchangeable acronym for the Transitional National Council, the NATO-supported Libyan rebel government.

The email also references the office of defense trade controls licensing, the State directorate in charge of registering arms exports.

The Dolarian Capital papers, dated May 18, 2011, include an end-user certificate that outlines a long list of heavy former Eastern-bloc weaponry and artillery to be shipped from the California-based arms dealer first to Kuwait, and then to Libya.

“This is to certify the following items are to be delivered by Dolarian Capital, Inc. [of] Fresno, California, United States and secured by M/s Specter Consultancy Services G.T.C. [of] Kuwait City, Kuwait to the Ministry of Interior of the Translational [sic] Government of Libya. The Ministry of Interior has agreed the items are for the exclusive disposition of the Ministry of Interior of the Translational [sic] Government of Libya and will not be re-exported or transferred to any third countries,” the certificate reads.

Just one month earlier, Mrs. Clinton privately endorsed inside the State Department the idea of using arms merchants to help the Libyans. “Fyi. The idea of using private security experts to arm the opposition should be considered,” Mrs. Clinton wrote in an email to her most senior aides.

Dolarian Capital and other U.S. arms merchants — all legally registered with the State Department — have worked with U.S. intelligence over the years to move covert shipments into hot spots around the globe such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Nigeria.

It applied for several State Department licenses to ship weapons to Libya, but only one got approved and then only temporarily before being revoked. The one export listed in the certificate was among the smaller shipments the company proposed for Libya, according to people familiar with the applications. In each instance, State and other U.S. agencies were directly aware the end destinations for the weapons were in Libya.

Dolarian Capital also is listed in court records as the source of weapons for another U.S. arms dealer, Marc Turi, who sought permission to ship weapons to Libya during the same time frame. Mr. Turi since has been charged criminally with making false statements in his application for those shipments, and has publicly asserted that Mrs. Clinton’s State Department and other U.S. officials sanctioned his involvement.

His attorney, J. Cabou, told The Times on Tuesday his client intends to show the United States facilitated the possible weapons shipments to Libya, which never occurred.

Mr. Turi strongly believes he had the permission of the U.S. government to engage in the actions for which he is now charged with and he is vigorously trying to prove that fact,” Mr. Cabou said in a phone interview.

Supporting Mr. Turi’s case is a former CIA officer named David Manners, who has told a federal judge in the case that “It was then, and remains now, my opinion that the United States did participate, directly or indirectly, in the supply of weapons to the Libyan Transitional National Council (TNC).”
The end-user certificate for the one Dolarian transfer, obtained by The Times, details an itemized list of Soviet developed weapons including 10 Konkrus missile launchers, 6,900 RPK, AKM, SPG-9 machine guns and 100 grenade launchers. It also included two Soviet SVD sniper rifles and nearly 8 million rounds of ammunition.

An authorization letter signed by TNC Defense Minister Omar Hareery accompanied the certificate “call[ing] upon” TNC Interior Minister Esam M.T. Shibani and representatives from Specter Consultancy GTC to “supply all military surplus and hardware to the Transitional National Council of Libya [and] provide military and security consultancy for both civilian and government elements within Libya.”

The sensitivity of U.S. involvement in arming the Libya rebels stems from a U.N. embargo.

On March 17, 2011, the U.N. passed Resolution 1973, which imposed a no-fly zone over Libya and also established a panel of experts to monitor the arms embargo.

However, on March 27, 2011, only days after the intervention began, Mrs. Clinton argued that the arms embargo could be disregarded if shipping weapons to rebels would help protect civilians, a claim that came under immediate fire from British defense officials who disagreed with her interpretation of international law.

“We’re not arming the rebels. We’re not planning to arm the rebels,” British Defense Secretary Liam Fox told the BBC the same day Mrs. Clinton hinted otherwise.

In February, The Times published as part of a series on the 2011 NATO intervention classified Libyan intelligence reports including a 16-page weapons list corroborated by Gadhafi aide and U.S. intelligence asset, Mohammed Ismael.

The weapons list revealed where and when arms were brought to both terror and jihadi groups in Libyan cities including the rebel fortress of Benghazi by the country of Qatar. It did not detail the weapons’ point of origin, but in February 2012 Qatari officials sent a letter to the U.N. “categorically” denying they had “supplied the revolutionaries with arms and ammunitions.”

Tape recordings obtained and released by The Times earlier this year depicting secret calls between a U.S. intelligence asset and members of the Gadhafi family revealed the then Libyan regime believed NATO was helping Qatar and other countries illegally smuggle arms across their country’s borders to aide rebel forces in an attempt to destabilize Libya.

In a May 2011 telephone call between U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich and heir apparent Seif Gadhafi, Mr. Gadhafi alleged illegal arms shipments were coming into his country.

Mr. Kucinich, an outspoken critic against the Libyan intervention who has since retired from the Congress, told the Times he would not be surprised to learn the U.S. violated the arms embargo.

“Violating the arms embargo to send heavy weapons to Libyan rebels was a phase in engineering a crisis to establish a pretext for U.S. intervention and overthrow of the Libyan government, a very dirty business indeed,” Mr. Kucinich said.

The U.N. Security Council unanimously reinforced the embargo in May when the 15-member panel declined a request from the TNC for fighter jets, attack helicopters and munitions, fearing the weapons could get into the wrong hands.

This blogger has written about the operations in Benghazi, 3 days directly after the attack:

https://founderscode.com/look-who-hillary-hired-for-benghazi-help/admin/

https://founderscode.com/13-hours-of-benghazi-hat-tip-to-the-heroes-rip-to-the-heroes/admin/

https://founderscode.com/wall-street-and-5th-avenue-planned-for-benghazi/admin/

https://founderscode.com/tanto-explains-13-hours-of-benghazi/admin/

https://founderscode.com/the-chase-in-benghazi/admin/

 

 

Western Wall as Muslim territory….WHAT?

Posted on by

Does the Bible matter? Does archeology matter? Does history matter? Does the United Nations matter? Defund the United Nations…PERIOD.

Israel’s Ambassador to UNESCO says the resolution is “a total Islamization” of a site that is revered by both the Jewish and Muslim faiths.

JPost: Israel is working to thwart a draft UNESCO resolution which declares that the Western Wall in Jerusalem – the most holy site in Judaism – belongs to al-Aksa Mosque compound.

The draft text to be voted on Wednesday in Paris states that UNESCO “affirms that the Buraq Plaza is an integral part of al-Aksa Mosque/al-Haram al-Sharif.”

Israeli Ambassador to UNESCO Carmel Shama Hacohen called the resolution “a total Islamization” of a site that is revered by both Jews and Muslims.

The six-page draft resolution – submitted by Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates on behalf of the Palestinian Authority to the UNESCO Executive Board – broadly condemns Israeli actions in Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza.

At no point does the resolution mention the Jewish historical connection to Jerusalem, which dates back to biblical times. Nor does it reference the Temple Mount or the Western Wall, which was part of the retaining wall King Herod built for the Temple Mount more than 2,000 years ago. It also relies solely on Arabic names for the holy sites on and around the Temple Mount. More here.

Arab nations ask UN to designate Western Wall as Muslim territory

FNC: False rumors about Israel’s designs on a site held sacred by both Jews and Muslims helped trigger the bloody wave of attacks plaguing Jerusalem, but a tangible plan by six Arab nations to purge the Jewish State’s claim to its holiest location will be voted on Wednesday by the United Nations’ cultural arm.

A UN draft decision circulated by Algeria, Egypt, Kuwait, Morocco, Tunisia and the United Arab Emirates reviewed by FoxNews.com “affirms that the Buraq Plaza is an integral part of the Al-Aqsa Mosque” –  a statement that would specifically fold the Jewish Western Wall into Islamic domain on the Temple Mount.

“This is a clear endeavor to distort history, in order to erase the connection between the Jewish People and its holiest site, and to create a false reality,” the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a Monday statement.

“This is a clear endeavor to distort history”

– Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement

The glut of recent attacks by Palestinian terrorists is partially a reaction to unsubstantiated rumors that Israel sought to change the status quo at the Temple Mount, a location of iconic Jewish and Muslim structures which is overseen by an Islamic trust known as the Waqf. Ironically, Arab countries responded to the rumors of a status quo shift with a concrete proposal for a status quo shift.

The Western Wall is a remnant of a retaining wall that supported the second Jewish temple. Jews are not permitted to pray on the Temple Mount by rabbinic decree, so the Western Wall is the closest they can venture to their most hallowed grounds.

 

A vote had initially been expected Tuesday in Paris, but UNESCO Director General Irina Bokova sought to delay it. The Bulgarian diplomat, who could be a candidate for UN Secretary General when the position opens up, issued a statement Tuesday saying she “deplores the recent proposals under discussion by the UNESCO Executive Board that could be seen to alter the status of the Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls, inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage list, and that could further incite tensions.”

The statement adds: “The protection of cultural heritage should not be taken hostage.”

The five-page draft decision, which only acknowledges the Jewish state as “Israel, the Occupying Power,” was circulated by the six Arab states because Palestine is not a member of the UNESCO Executive Board. The portion that would push the Western Wall into Islam’s purview is only a sentence on the second page. Much of the rest of the document largely blames Israel for past and present violence and further stresses an Islamic claim to everything on the Temple Mount.

The final page attempts to strengthen Palestinian links to other contested areas by reaffirming traditional burial sites for several major biblical figures claimed by both Jews and Muslims “are an integral part of Palestine.”

UNESCO initially approved a resolution designating Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem and the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron as “integral” parts “of Palestine” in 2010. That decision prompted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to ask, “If the places where the Jewish nation’s forefathers and mothers – Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Sarah, Rebecca, Leah and Rachel – were buried 4,000 years ago is not part of the Jewish nation’s heritage, then what is a heritage site?”

Fox News’ Jonathan Wachtel contributed to this report.