|
How Do “Unarmed People” “Return fire”?
A few days after the recent attacks on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi someone whipped up a crowd and had it attack the bases of some militia group. The usual western media who had cheered for the overthrowing and killing of Gaddhafi are trying to tell us that this was some peaceful protest, pro-American and only to drive out some jihadist militia. But that does not seem to be the full story.
The Guardian headlines:
Unarmed people power drums Libya’s jihadists out of Benghazi
The sub headline says:
These were the incredible scenes in Benghazi as tens of thousands of ordinary citizens marched on the Islamic extremists in their compounds and drove them out with shouts, placards and sheer courage
The piece is by one Chris Stephen who writes as if he was there. According to him those who attacked those Salafi/Jihadists groups were unarmed people with only shouts, placards and sheer courage.
But down in Mr Stephen’s article we find this:
Then the cry went up to march on Hwari, the sprawling base of another militia, Raffala al-Sahati, to which Ansar al-Sharia men were believed to have fled. El Farsi found his car, a BMW, and roared off south.
Protesters crammed into cars, hooting horns and waving Libyan tricolours as an impromptu convoy surged south. But this time the response was different. The first protesters who marched on the gates were met by machine gun fire, triggering pandemonium.
…
As protester numbers grew and fire was returned, the base garrison fled, abandoning vehicles, guns and huge quantities of ammunition which the crowd looted.
Mr Stephen’s does not say with what those “unarmed people” returned fire. Did they fire shouts? Placards? Sheer courage?
Mr. Stephens also doesn’t explain why the “unarmed” mob would attack the Raffala al-Sahati group at all. It was mentioned in no report about the attack on the U.S. embassy and had likely nothing to do with it.
From another news source we find that the group is aligned with and under command of the central government and that it was based in regular military barracks.
Protesters also attacked the headquarters of the Raf Allah al-Sahati brigade, an Islamist group which is under the authority of the defence ministry, on Benghazi’s outskirts.
An AFP correspondent said the assailants walked away with weapons, ammunition and computers. After two hours of fierce fighting during which rockets were used, they managed to drive out members of the brigade.
So according to the AFP Stephen’s “unarmed people” won a two hour battle in which machineguns and rockets (I assume this means Rocket Propelled Grenades) were used. All this with “shouts, placards and sheer courage”?
And what about those 6 dead soldiers which, after the mob had left, were found in those barracks with their hands tied and bullets in their heads? Did the “unarmed” protesters use “shouts, placards and sheer courage” to accomplish that?
Somehow Mr Stephen’s story of peaceful protesters driving out jihadists does not add up. That might be because he doesn’t bother to write about the real question.
Why did the Benghazi mob attack and executed forces of the newly elected central government? Could that be because 39% of them prefer a strong man rule while only 29% prefer democracy? And who were the real “extremists” here?
FoxNews, Sep 24
Libya latest example of administration downplaying terror strike
President Obama’s advisers claim to be doing the best they can in difficult circumstances to explain what happened in the deadly assault on the U.S. Consulate in Libya. But their questionable claim out of the gate that the attack was a “spontaneous” outburst triggered by protests over an anti-Islam film in neighboring Egypt fits a pattern, critics say, of downplaying both attempted and successful terrorist strikes. “It’s the nothing-to-see-here answer,” said Republican strategist Tony Sayegh.
Why would the U.S. downplay a terror strike? Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed Hamouda bin Qumu has been identified as a potential figure behind the attack, which killed four Americans, including US Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens. So what’s the problem with nailing bin Qumu for Benghazi?
Bin Qumu is a leading member of the Ansar al-Shariah brigade in Benghazi, which has been blamed for the attack. He also reportedly is a member of the Al Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) and leads the Darnah Brigade—an armed group in his home town of Darnah in northeastern Libya, which fought on the side of NATO in the war for regime change last year.
He was captured in Pakistan after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, accused of being a member of the militant Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, and sent to Guantánamo — in part because of information provided by Colonel Qaddafi’s government. “The Libyan Government considers detainee a ‘dangerous man with no qualms about committing terrorist acts,’ ” says the classified 2005 assessment, evidently quoting Libyan intelligence findings, which was obtained by The New York Times.
For more than five years, Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed Hamuda bin Qumu was a prisoner at the Guantánamo Bay prison, judged “a probable member of Al Qaeda” by the analysts there. They concluded in a newly disclosed 2005 assessment that his release would represent a “medium to high risk, as he is likely to pose a threat to the U.S., its interests and allies.”
Nevertheless, Hamouda bin Qumu was returned to Libya in 2007, where Chris stevens helped him get settled in. Stevens was DCM (Deputy Chief of Mission) from 2007 to 2009.
wikileaks: O 131650Z DEC 07
FM AMEMBASSY TRIPOLI
SUBJECT: LIBYA: FOLLOW-UP ON ACCESS TO RETURNED GTMO DETAINEES
“. . .acknowledged to DCM and P/E Chief the GOL’s commitment to provide Embassy access to returned Guantanamo Bay detainees.. . . Dr. Sawani characterized access to the returned detainees as “a straightforward matter” and said he was “sure” visits with al-Rimi and Hamouda could be quickly arranged. .” .”
wikileaks: O 030917Z JAN 08
FM AMEMBASSY TRIPOLI
SUBJECT: LIBYA: FAMILY VISIT FOR RETURNED GTMO DETAINEE CONFIRMED
“…Ben Qumu Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed Hamouda. . .claimed to have not had a family visit. . . A/DCM spoke with . . .counterpart Muhammad Tarnish January 2 . .[Hamouda’s] physical condition and spirits as “very good”
In March 2011 Christopher Stevens attended a meeting in Paris between Clinton, Sarkozy and Jabril, set up by Bernard-Henri Lévy. Stevens was among those who urged Clinton to describe to President Obama the call for help that he had just heard. From March 2011 to November 2011 Stevens was Special Representative to the National Transitional Council in Benghazi. During this time, Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed Hamuda bin Qumu was a notable figure in the Libyan rebels’ fight to oust Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi. bin Qumu was a leader of a ragtag band of fighters known as the Darnah Brigade — a remarkable turnabout resulting from shifting American policies.
Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 24 2012 16:57 utc | 11
|
