Spellchek

"If a word in the dictionary were misspelled,how would we know?"-Stephen Wright

Who is Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed Hamuda bin Qumu? Is he the reason for the Benghazi cover-up?

Posted by 5etester on November 11, 2012

Who is he and why should you care? He is the prime suspect in the Benghazi attack that killed 4 Americans including Ambassador Chris Stevens. You should care because we had him locked up in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba until 2007 when he was released into the custody of Libya. He was considered a probable member of Al-Qaeda who represented a “medium to high risk, as he is likely to pose a threat to the U.S., its interests and allies.”

He was captured in Pakistan after 9/11 and with the help of intel from Gaddafi in Libya. Gaddafi released him in 2010 and he subsequently fought to oust Gaddafi as a member of the Darnah Brigade. Incidentally, Darnah is the world’s top recruiting area for suicide bombers.

Ironically, Qumu was considered an asset by the Obama administration. This was part of their narrative supporting the Arab Spring. Infiltration from the outside by Al-Qaeda was labeled the true threat as local Islamist fighters were considered to have a “local agenda” and thus not a threat to the West. Presumably the “local agenda” referred to the ousting of Gaddafi.

Here are some excerpts from his Guantanamo file. If you’re interested, you can see the entire file here – http://wikileaks.org/gitmo/pdf/ly/us9ly-000557dp.pdf

Prior History: Detainee served as a tank driver in the Libyan armed forces as a private.

The Libyan Govemment states he was addicted to illegal drugs/narcotics and had been

accused of a number of crimes including: murder, physical assault, armed assault, and

distributingn arcotics. He was sentencedto l0 yearsi n prison. In 1993,h e escapedfr om

prison and fled to Egypt. He traveled to Afghanistan (AF) and trained at Usama Bin Laden’s

(UBL) Torkham Camp. After participating in the Soviet jihad, he moved to Sudan (SU).

Detaineew orked as a truck driver for Wadi Al-‘Aqiq, one of UBL’s companiesin Suba,S U.

The Libyan Govemment funher stated detainee joined LIFG and was assigned to the military

committee. Under pressuref rom the Libyan and Sudaneseg ovemments,h e left Sudan

sometime in 1997, using a false Mauritanian passport. He traveled to Pakistan (PK), where

he resided in the area near the Al-Atariyah University/mosque (variants Al Yassir Al

Khayria, Athariya and Atharia) in Peshawar.

A rundown of his training.

Training and Activities: In 1998, he withdrew from the LIFG and joined the Taliban

movement (this is likely a reference to Al-Qaida support to the Taliban). He moved to

Peshawawr here he lived with Abu Zayd Al-Tunisi (assessetdo be US9LY-000721). In

2000,h e lived in the tribal region of PeshawarP, K (This is anareau ndert ribal control,n ot

government control. UBL was known to have spent time in this area). He communicated

with likely extremist elements in Afghanistan via radio during this period, indicating a

position of leadership. Around August to November 2001, detainee worked for Al-Wafa in

Kabul, AF. Detainee fought with the Taliban against the Northem Alliance and was

wounded in the leg. He left Kabul around mid-November 2001. Khalid Mahmound Abdul

Al Wahad, US9JO-000589, stated detainee fled to Peshawar, where he likely assisted the

Qadhafi Foundation in relocating extremists and their families.

It would appear that Qumu had a significant intelligence value and that he may have been released in an effort to track Al-Qaeda activities as well as to help overthrow Gaddafi. Instead, it was Qumu who lived to see Gaddafi dead as well as extracting revenge against America in the form of Benghazi. The focus on the congressional hearings this week will be on the cover-up of Benghazi during and after the attack. We need to be examining why an enemy combatant of high intelligence value considered to be a high risk to American interests was ever released. The Obama Administration has plenty of questions to answer about how it handled the attack and covered it up. More importantly, we need to get to the bottom of why Qumu was released and what was the CIA involvement in supplying weapons to Syria via Turkey. Was Qumu employed as a double agent by the CIA to overthrow Gaddafi? David Petraeus would know.

That appears to be the likely scenario for the whole cover-up affair. Not only did we have an Ambassador conducting a covert operation to supply Libyan arms and fighters to Syria with CIA support, he himself was killed by an Al-Qaeda double agent working for the CIA at one point. Very messy business. Also one that would have had involvement from top brass in the Pentagon, the State Dept., the CIA as well as the White House. The Petraeus exit may just be the tip of the iceberg in the lengths that the Obama Administration will go to keep the lid on this.

UPDATE*** – Since posting this, I forgot about this video from Glenn Beck in which he tries to lay out the Obama-Libya-Turkey-Syria connection. But in the end he leaves you with the question of what the U.S. gain is.

Let me answer that question that Glenn Beck couldn’t. I touched on it in this recent post – http://spellchek.wordpress.com/2012/11/03/the-benghazi-cover-story-is-coming-after-the-election/

We’ve already seen how Egypt has backfired with the Muslim Brotherhood in charge. Libya will follow suit. The Arab Spring seemed like a good thing for America with the removal of several long-time tyrants throughout the region. Replacing them with Al-Qaeda hardly seems beneficial. Syria and Lebanon will follow. Interesting isn’t it that the list of countries seems to be generally following the model Gen. Wesley Clark laid out back in a 2007 interview.

Ask yourself what common goal would the U.S. have to replace regimes throughout the Middle East that bridges different administrations? It certainly isn’t replacing dictators and tyrants for Al-Qaeda. The answer is strategic. Energy.

Bashad in Syria has a plan to become the distribution capital of the Middle East, not the supplier, but the crossroads of pipelines to deliver energy products. It’s called the Four Seas policy. Of course, they will be paid royalties in doing so. Bashad is trying to shut out Turkey in its endeavors. Turkey is our ally. So who wins? It won’t be Bashad.

The reason the United States is involved in all of these destabilizing efforts throughout the region is merely a strategic one. Eliminating our competitors from establishing monopolies and ensuring that energy products are all on the global market. That’s considered the best way to reduce our exposure to directly influencing the U.S. economy with supply and cost manipulation.

Perhaps Obama has some additional incentive to dictate events in the interest of his Muslim roots as well. But that’s for another post.

6 Responses to “Who is Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed Hamuda bin Qumu? Is he the reason for the Benghazi cover-up?”

  1. LD Jackson said

    I am afraid your “tip of the iceberg” phrase may be all too true. If we continue turning over the rocks in Benghazi, there is no telling what we will find.

  2. [...] Spellchek: Who is Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed Hamuda bin Qumu? [...]

  3. [...] friend who runs the Spellchek blog post something that is pure dynamite. When you finish here today, I hope you will ship over there [...]

  4. It’s amazing that this story hasn’t grown any legs since Fox broke the story on 19 September. google the guy’s name and this post is item No.2. What does it take to make this the story that it should be? Why hasn’t Fox done more?

    That is the first time I saw the General Clark video. Wow!

    “Ask yourself what common goal would the U.S. have to replace regimes throughout the Middle East that bridges different administrations? It certainly isn’t replacing dictators and tyrants for Al-Qaeda. The answer is strategic. Energy.”

    What I can’t wrap my mind around is this. How is it possible for the brain trusts that think up this stuff to think that the US could do this and that Russia and China would just sit on the sidelines? That is why I think war is part of a bigger plan.

  5. 5etester said

    Perhaps even Fox has just been going after the low hanging fruit first. It’s just so damning. Once again, the U.S. government is the enabler. They wanted to turn this guy into a CIA intel asset and instead got burned.

    Consider this as well. On June 6, a dry run was conducted in which a hole was blown in the consulate (mission – whatever) wall big enough for 40 men to run through. Less than a week later, the British Ambassador is attacked in his motorcade leading to the Brits to close their consulate and pull out of Libya. Not only does this further degrade the Administration’s argument about not knowing ahead of time, what if those weapons used to attack the motorcade were supplied by the CIA as part of their arming insurgents campaign? The Brits also left their weapons at the U.S. consulate when they pulled out and they are now ‘missing’. Also, why is Africom the ONLY region in the world in which our General didn’t have a ‘commander-in-extremis’ force in place? Coincidence? Every other region has a special ops quick response force in place at all times ready to go. But not in the most volatile region in the world?

    What I can’t wrap my mind around is this

    I look at this in the opposite way. I see the U.S. strategy of destabilizing some regimes, overthrowing others and just in general picking and choosing who goes and who stays IN RESPONSE to the policies of Russia and China. Both Russia and China have aggressively pursued policies to secure energy access (The Great Game, The New Great Game). Especially China of late. Leaving the morality judgement aside, if we don’t PROACTIVELY stop Russia and China from securing access, we will be at a disadvantage tactically and strategically going forward. Obama just makes it worse with his green agenda. Otherwise, what possible justification do we have for our pick and choose policy? And why has it been in place for decades bridging different administrations and policy agendas? Furthermore, why can’t this be part of the ‘bigger plan’ you reference?

  6. [...] Who is Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed Hamuda bin Qumu? Is he the reason for the Benghazi cover-up?. [...]

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 77 other followers

%d bloggers like this: