Please read this article. I realize that it is long, but it
is important for understanding the times that we are living in, and what is
happening to our nation. Right now, Senator Rand Paul is trying to hold up
Brennan’s nomination and find out more about him. Please pray for Senator Rand
Paul and his efforts. And for our nation. Making this man the head of the CIA
would put the fox in charge of the hen house.
2008 Passport office break-in, 2012: Innocence of Muslims explained
Brennan: from Barack to Benghazi
Doug Hagmann
Friday, February 22, 2013
{NOTE: Douglas J. Hagmann is the founder and director
of the Northeast Intelligence Network. Hagmann is a 26-year veteran private
investigator who has worked as an operational asset for the U.S. Department of
Justice, the FBI, the New York and Pennsylvania State Police. He is the author
of “Tactical Surveillance,” a textbook used for training surveillance
operatives. He is the CEO of a multi-state licensed private investigative agency
and a senior columnist for Canada Free Press. He’s a frequent guest on
nationally syndicated radio shows.]
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/53284
Benghazi. Few Americans ever heard of the city in Libya
until the murder of four Americans, including a U.S. ambassador, on September
11, 2012. Fewer still heard of the movie Innocence of Muslims, until it was
suddenly blamed for a non-existent protest outside of a non-existent embassy in
Benghazi within hours of the attack.
For two weeks in our nations history, the obscure and amateurish video was
persistently and very publicly cited as the cause for the protests and murders
in Benghazi by the highest ranking officials in the Obama administration. Barack
Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice,
and others blamed the little known video for the attack on what was deliberately
mischaracterized as a U.S. consulate in Benghazi.
Even today, the majority of officials in power dont seem to want to talk
about what happened in Benghazi, and Obama and Clinton repeatedly stonewalled
all legitimate investigation of the incident. Why? Because any honest
investigation into the activities taking place there would confirm a secret CIA
operation intended to arm anti-Assad rebels, including the Iranian and Syrian
backed Ansar al Sharia terror group. The purpose of this operation, the
objective of which remains in place, is to topple Assad and replace him with a
Saudi-backed leader. Based on research and investigation, it appears that
somewhere amid the magicians fog of this illegal black op overthrow is
John O. Brennan.
The Arabic-speaking John Brennan, who serves as Obamas assistant for
Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and is the choice to head the CIA, has
seen his share of exposure in the alternative media lately. Most recently,
former FBI agent John Guandolo alleged that Brennan, while working as the CIA
station chief in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia from 1996 to 1999, converted to Islam.
According to agent Guandolo, Brennan visited Mecca and Medina during the Hajj,
which are traditionally off limits to non-Muslims during that period. Former
agent Guandolo cites Brennans presence and his comments about his visits as
evidence of his conversion.
Beyond his possible conversion to Islam, however, Brennans other actions are
much more troubling, particularly as they relate to his past history with Obama,
and more recent history related to Benghazi, drone warfare, and his involvement
with an administrative kill list. It appears possible that, by nominating
Brennan to be the nations top spy chief, Obama might be tying up loose ends
that are shrouded by controversy. One loose end is the Benghazi operation and
the manner in which an obscure Internet video was immediately blamed. Yet
another loose end relates to Obamas passport records while he was on the
campaign trail in 2008. These two significant incidents involving questions and
controversy, lies and murder, are like bookends to a four-year stint in a star
chamber.
Based on extensive investigation by this author, the former might well relate
to the latter, as determined by the digital footprints and historical digital
records of both incidents. Investigation of both incidents finds common digital
forensic factors that suggest that the same person or persons involved in the
2008 passport office break-in (or at least the same entities) might be involved
in the dissemination of the video Innocence of Muslims immediately following the
2012 attacks in Benghazi. Or, it would appear that way.
It is the professional opinion of this author (holding certification in
Internet Profiling) that both incidents, despite this four-year span, appear to
involve companies associated with corporate entities serving, or otherwise
connected to, the U.S. government. This was determined through analysis of the
IP addresses used to upload and change certain characteristics of the video,
among other investigative indications.
Based on this research and investigation, the one person identified as
seeming to have some level of involvement in the midst of both incidents is
John O. Brennan.
2008 Passport office break-in
It has been reported and confirmed that computer files maintained and managed
by the United States Passport Office were illegally accessed on three separate
occasions in 2008 as follows: 9 January 2008, 21 February 2008,
and 14 March 2008. Although the initial story broke in The Washington
Times on Thursday, 20 March 2008, an
article containing additional information was published two days later, on
Saturday, 22 March 2008.
At that time, it was disclosed by State Department spokesman Sean McCormack
that three (3) employees of two (2) separate government contracting firms
were suspected in the break-in, and that the files accessed included those of
then-Presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and
John McCain. The motives for the accessing of records was unclear, according to
investigating officials. The firms that employed the suspects were identified as
Stanley, Inc. (a firm that employed two suspects), and The Analysis
Corporation(that employed one suspect).
Of note is that, according to published reports, in 2006 the firm identified
as Stanley, Inc. was awarded a $164 million government contract to print new
U.S. passports. Despite the security breach, Stanley, Inc. (currently a wholly
owned subsidiary of CGI Federal, Inc.) announced on 17 March 2008 that they were
awarded a five-year, $570 million contract to continue support of the U.S.
Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs/Passport Services Directorate.
The contract services include the production, operational and business
process support training, procurement, administration and evaluation of critical
supplies, and facilities management support at the four Passport Centers, and 14
Passport Agencies nationwide, along with the Headquarters support offices.
The Analysis Corporation (TAC), based in McLean, Virginia is a wholly owned
subsidiary and the intelligence division of Global Defense Technology & Systems,
Inc. (GTEC), a defense contracting company that is focused on mission-critical,
technology-based U.S. national security solutions. It has been since renamed
Sotera Defense Solutions.
Founded in 1990, the Analysis Corporation has been working on
counterterrorism and national security projects, including (but not limited to)
maintaining national watch-listing activities. According to open source
reports, the intelligence part of GTEC is staffed by former senior officials
from the intelligence community. They are operationally involved with nearly
every branch of the intelligence community, including the U.S. Department of
State, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI), and Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).
It is important to note that two employees working for Stanley, Inc. were
fired. A third employee of The Analysis Corporation was the primary focus of the
ongoing investigation. At the time of the break-in, the Analysis Corporation
was owned and operated by John O. Brennan (CEO from November 2005 to January
2009). It is also important to note that during this period, John O. Brennan
served as a close advisor to Obama in 2008 on matters of intelligence and
foreign policy. Following a 25-year career in the CIA, Brennan also worked with
the campaign to elect Obama during his first presidential campaign.
With regard to the breach of the passport office files, revelations regarding
the results of the government investigation appear to have fallen into a deep,
black hole in terms of any publication of investigative findings. Aside from the
termination of two of the three suspects, the legal disposition of their cases
(including the employee of Stanley, Inc.) remains unknown.
Unintended consequence?
At the time of the passport office break-in, Barack Hussein Obama was on the
campaign trail as the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. The news of
the breach was made public within a week of the last intrusion. A week later, on
21 March 2008, while Obama was campaigning, he was asked for his reaction by ABC
News Jake Tapper. It is obvious that Obama became officially aware that the
public had been informed about the level of the breach, and that his personal
and confidential biographical information, in addition to his international
travels on his diplomatic and personal passport, were apparently accessed.
On April 8, 2008, Obama admitted, for the first time in any public venue
as a presidential candidate,
that he traveled to Pakistan in 1981. It is reasonable to ask
whether Obama would have disclosed his Pakistan trip at this time had it not
been for his uncertainty about whether or not the information had already been
made public.
Even ABC News appeared surprised at this sudden and unexpected revelation,
considering all of the talk about Pakistan and U.S. foreign policy during the
previous several months. It is critical to understand that Obama never disclosed
his Pakistan trip at any time during any policy discussions or debates prior to
the passport office breach.
Mysterious death
Deeper investigation into the break-in found evidence that, in addition to
the passport files, ancillary documentation of Obama, Clinton, McCain and
several others was also compromised. Information that would facilitate identity
fraud was also breached, as was the credit header information of various
individuals. Based on this authors most recent investigative findings, it is
the professional belief of this author that this additional information provides
the link between the break-in and an individual known as Lieutenant Quarles
Harris, Jr. [Authors note: Lieutenant (and all known spelling variations)
is the individuals given name, and does not represent any rank in any
military or law enforcement agency.]
It is also important to point out that during the investigation of the breach
of the passport office records, The Washington Times reported that officials do
not know whether information was improperly copied, altered or removed
from the database during the intrusions [Emphasis added]. As time progressed,
so did the leaks. It was learned that at least one employee at the U.S.
Department of State was a co-conspirator in the break-in.
According to published reports, that employee might have shared credit card
information obtained during the breach with a man identified as Lieutenant
Quarles Harris, Jr.
Based on the continued investigation of this author, it appears that Harris
was the intended recipient of stolen credit card information from a State
Department employee also involved in the breaches, but he received more than
what he bargained for. When he realized the scope of the crime and the explosive
nature of the information he possessed, he turned to investigators for
protection. He also began to talk with investigators, and ultimately he made a
deal with federal prosecutors.
Before he could make good on his deal, Lieutenant Quarles Harris, Jr. was
found shot to death in his car on April 17, 2008, just over a month after the
last breach. He was found in front of the Judah House Praise Baptist Church in
the northeast section of Washington. He had been shot once in the head.
The murder of Harris remains unsolved, and the official account of the murder
is that Harris was either a victim of random violence, or his murder was a
result of a street deal gone bad.
2012: Innocence of Muslims explained
In many ways, the video Innocence of Muslims can be compared to the bloody
glove found at Rockingham, a reference to a piece of evidence in the infamous
O.J. Simpson murder trial. The video is critical evidence in the murder of four
Americans – men who died in a dusty land on the dark continent. Due to the lies
perpetuated by those in office, they will be denied earthly justice as Americans
continue to passively accept the contemptible hubris of those spinning such
tales. In this investigation of multiple murders, felonious and even traitorous
activities, however, the video provides important clues in the form of digital
bread crumbs. These digital bread crumbs have left a trail directly to the
doorstep of agencies involved in playing a supporting role in U.S.
counter-terror operations, and those in the government they serve.
The video is the Achilles heel that serves to expose their nefarious
cover-up.
Many perplexing questions remain unanswered about the video that Obama,
Clinton, Rice, Carney and others blamed on the attack and murders in Benghazi.
Although Ive carefully documented the history of the video that ultimately came
to be known as The Innocence of Muslims in a previous report (available
here), a few key issues to summarize new and significant findings, however,
need to be addressed.
First, it is the professional opinion of this author, based on extensive
investigation, that the video was a made-to-order production by orders from
– and payment by – our own intelligence community. The alleged producer of
the video, publicly identified as Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, was associated with
an individual known as Eiad Salameh, the cousin of Walid Shoebat, a man well
known in counter-terrorism circles. According to Shoebat, Salameh was the
subject of an extensive FBI investigation relating to a large-scale fraud
operation several years ago.
According to Mr. Shoebat, his cousin Salameh was in the sights of the FBI for
three decades. During this period, he had reportedly committed numerous federal
crimes that were known to the FBI, but he was never arrested. This author was
able to confirm that Salameh was connected to Nakoula, specifically for the
purposes of this video, and that the activities of both men were well known to
the FBI at the highest levels. This author also confirmed the facts presented by
Mr. Shoebat in his 23-page report titled Anti-Muhammad Film Innocence of
Muslims has a terrorist financier connection that includes major failures at
the FBI. However, this author disputes some of Shoebats conclusions based on
evidence that was unavailable to him.
To be precise, it is the contention of this author, based on an examination
of numerous court documents, and the totality of evidence, that the video was
created and produced by individuals who were acting as operational assets for
the FBI. If this type of activity sounds familiar, it should, as it is the same
template that is commonly and frequently used by our government. It is the same
template used in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and numerous
terrorist operations since.
It appears possible that the FBI had enough evidence of criminal wrongdoing
by Salameh and his associates to send him to jail indefinitely. Because Salameh
and his associates had contacts with terrorists in other countries and were
communicating with them, the CIA became involved as well. Based on the evidence
reviewed, it is the professional opinion of this investigator that the causal
conduit between the FBI and the CIA was John Brennan, who was acting at the time
as the assistant to President Barack Obama for Homeland Security and
Counterterrorism operations. Brennan also had numerous contacts within the
burgeoning world of private counter-intelligence companies and operatives.
From my investigative findings, it appears that the order for the video was
placed in 2011, at the time the Arab Spring was gaining momentum. It was also a
time when anti-Muslim sentiment and hate speech was gaining worldwide
attention in the U.S.
A video to incite and inflame Muslims was desired for the dual purpose of
causing violent outbreaks for specific times, and to create a catalyst to stifle
any criticism of Islam. However, no legitimate film producer wanted the job nor
could be trusted in this black op assignment. Accordingly, the FBI appears to
have given Nakoula (who was associated with Salameh) a choice between
cooperation and prison. It appears that he chose the former option.
Using a combination of willing participants and people duped into
cooperating, Nakoula used his connections to involve some more well-known
members within the anti-jihad movement, many who would sign on to any such
project without performing any diligent investigation of the people behind the
endeavor. While seeming to serve his handlers within the intelligence community,
Nakoula was also working for his own personal gain. Despite its actual low
budget, the cost to the intelligence agency funding it was high.
The production of the video began in July of 2011, about 14 months before the
Benghazi attack. The initial name of this production was called Desert Warrior,
but was changed on 30 June 2012 to The Innocence of Bn [sic] Laden. The
following day, it premiered at The Vine Theater in Los Angeles under that name
in order to provide legitimacy. Promotional flyers, written in Arabic, were
provided in advance of (and at) the opening. According to public accounts,
however, no one showed up to watch the movie, and it was quickly forgotten.
The roughly 14-minute video later appeared on the YouTube channel of a man
known as Sam Bacile under the title The Real Life of Mohammed, on 1 July 2012.
Clearly, the video had been digitally manipulated in an obviously amateurish
manner from the original filming to the final incarnation. Replacement of the
original dialogue with obviously antagonistic and insulting lines was clearly
evident in the final video that appeared online.
If Nakoula had an operating budget provided by the CIA, why was the video
such an obvious amateurish production? The reason, I was told by sources with
knowledge of this video, is that much of the money was used by Nakoula and
Salameh, who both had criminal histories involving fraud. Essentially, the FBI
and the CIA were out-conned by a couple of convicted con artists.
Meanwhile, the U.S. operations in Benghazi were being shut down, as the job
had been mostly completed and the U.S. was getting pressure from the Turkish and
Russian governments. The operatives in Benghazi needed a diversion to finish
their operation. A large-scale anti-American demonstration in Tripoli, Cairo or
elsewhere would serve as cover to wind things down in Benghazi, and would divert
and otherwise occupy the press.
Despite being poorly done, it is important to understand that the video
already had its legend established. This explains the curiously odd premier
at the Vine Theater, which was done, not for public consumption, but to
establish its fictitious pedigree. In the spy world, legends, or well-prepared
synthetic histories of a person (or in this case, a video) is vital.
Although far from perfect, the video Innocence of Muslims, having been
virtually dormant on an internet channel for months, was suddenly discovered
by Egyptian television host Sheikh Khalid Abdulla, who first aired the video on
9 September 2012. Well known in the world of counter-terrorism, Abdullah acted
as the Middle East conduit for the otherwise useless video. Due to the
persistent promotion of that video, protests broke out in Cairo and, more
importantly, at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli.
How did Khalid Abdulla even find the obscure video? It is the professional
opinion of this author that the answer might be found by identifying the YouTube
channel (or channels) on which it was uploaded. Tracing the digital fingerprints
of the various incarnations of the video from the first casting call (when it
was named Desert Warrior) to its final birthing as Innocence of Muslims, there
is an apparent connection to the IP address associated with Stanley, Inc., the
company previously referenced in the passport office break-in. From there, the
fingerprints get somewhat smudged, but a connection is possible to others in
the counter-terrorism and defense industry serving the U.S. government. In
short, Abdullah was given the video by our own intelligence community.
The motive was not only to cause a diversion, but also to facilitate the
undermining of First Amendment rights of all Americans, especially as they
relate to the criticism of Islam. If this sounds too far out or convenient, take
a look at the background of John Brennan, who spent time throughout the Middle
East, including Egypt. Furthermore, the U.S. intelligence agencies were heavily
influencing the media within Egypt following the toppling of Mubarak and the
installation of the Muslim Brotherhood backed regime.
Too much free speech is a bad thing
Even deeper investigation of John Brennan has taken this author to his 1980
graduate thesis titled Human Rights, A Case Study of Egypt, which he wrote while
at the University of Texas at Austin. Based on an extensive review of his
published thesis, it appears that Obama wants to have, as his top spymaster,
someone in favor of government censorship, or media manipulation for government
purposes. Brennans thesis offers valuable insight into his thinking and logic,
especially as it relates to his personal experiences in Egypt. Using such
personal experience, he seems readily able to justify government censorship
actions, as in the case of Egypt under Anwar Sadat. It is important to consider
that in his thesis, Brennan argues that too much uncensored or unchecked freedom
could be detrimental to Egypts political environment.
Brennans overtly pro-Islamic position is evident in the counter-terrorism
policies within the U.S. intelligence community. One would be remiss not to note
the revisions performed to our internal counter-terrorism training manuals that
removed all criticism of Islam under Brennans direction.
Given Brennans obvious pro-Islamic bias, the views he argued in his graduate
thesis (that include favoring government censorship under certain conditions),
his history with the CIA, and his close ties to Obama, is it not reasonable to
question Brennans activities while National Security Advisor to Obama during
the Benghazi attack? Even without the evidence described above? Specifically, is
it not possible that the blueprint for use of the video not only to cause a
necessary diversion, but to create a case against our First Amendment rights,
originated with Brennan at the behest of Obama?
Putting it all together
John Brennan, Obamas pick for top U.S. spy, has recently come under fire for
his stance on drone killings, secret kill lists, and in some circles, his
alleged conversion to Islam. Some will consider Brennan the obvious choice to
head the CIA, given his history with the agency. Few see a different side, a
side possibly connected to unseemly activities involving crimes and cover-ups.
Those who object to John Brennans nomination are doing so on the basis of
the obvious. Such examples include his support for enhanced interrogation
techniques, drone use, and the maintenance of a secret kill list from the star
chamber of the White House.
There are many more important questions about Brennan that need to be asked
and answered. Reader, do you care enough about the future of your children and
grandchildren to meet the challenge of asking these questions?
I believe Ive identified questions about his role in the 2008 passport
office security breach in which the file of Barack Obama, among others, was
accessed. In that case alone, it is reasonable to ask, What information having
significant political capital about Obama and others might be known to this spy
legend? Has the spirit of J. Edgar Hoover been resurrected in John Brennan?
How about his role in the murderous attacks in Benghazi, and the subsequent
cover-up? Or perhaps greater still, his role in the Saudi intelligence operation
known as Arab Spring?
America has a history of creating great spies. America also has a history of
turning out some spies who are adept at working all sides of an agenda,
including the opposing sides. At this point in our nations history, can we
afford to be anything except absolutely certain about the loyalty of our
appointees to our country, our Constitution, and our future? No one should be
appointed until every question is asked, answered, and verified.