Adapted from from Thomas Paine’s How We Dismatled the FBI in Our Pajamas
I simply had to take a deep breath and laugh in recent days, reading former CIA director John Brennan’s comments about Saudi Arabia. He seems very bent out of shape by the death of Saudi ‘journalist’ Jamal Khashoggi who no doubt was a Brennan asset.
The headline caught my eye in Townhall.com: “John Brennan Accuses Trump of Conspiring With the Saudis.”
Now that is about as rich as it comes. You have to give it to Brennan, he has some set of balls. All balls, no brain though. And that pretty much is the prerequisite for a career as a government intelligence operative turned political hit man. If Trump were or is conspiring with the Saudis, he would merely be following in the footsteps of Brennan himself, who bent over for the Saudi regime time and time again like a tramp on prom night.
Per Townhall:
Former CIA Director John Brennan suggested Wednesday night that President Trump is conspiring with Saudi leaders to make up a story about journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s disappearance. The Saudi journalist was last seen on October 2 walking into the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Turkey says the Saudis killed him, but Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman and Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud deny the charge. Trump suggested that he had no reason not to believe him and cited our economic relationship.
That left Brennan with this theory.
“So they’ve been working to concoct a story that’s going to stand up to the scrutiny that will be immediately put on it,” Brennan said on MSNBC. “How can they claim then that Mohammed bin Salman had no responsibility whatsoever. Is he looking for the scapegoats inside of Saudi Arabia? Has he already taken action against them?”
Still, if U.S. intelligence has damning information about Salman’s role in Khashoggi’s disappearance, “his story is going to fall apart,” Brennan said.
Many times I contemplate whether these beltway players are stupid and inept or just removed so far from reality that they can’t process comments and issues like normal, balanced Americans. You would think Brennan would keep his mouth shut about ALL things and count the millions he has raked in on the side, cutting security deals – and who knows what else. And people actually pay him big money in speaking fees as well. Liberals love to shell out the cash to listen to big names reaffirm their political ideologies. They need that pat on the back. Conservatives – at least the ones I know and associate with — do not.
Note that in the above article, Brennan literally states “his story is going to fall apart.” He’s right to be projecting, and Brennan is a classic projectionist. A first-year law student could pick him apart during cross-examination. The story that is falling apart belongs to Brennan. And his secret jockeying with the Saudis. And his knowledge of an exclusive deal between the Saudis and Iranians to not only house Osama bin Laden – but other members of al-Qaeda – including bin Laden’s son who ran the terror faction after his father’s reported death at the hands of America.
According to interviews with Intel insiders and documents, Brennan was well versed on the deal between the Saudis and Iranians to safeguard bin Laden. But now we are raising the stakes. The agreement to give bin Laden refuge in Iran was a package deal extended to the top personnel in al-Qaeda and their family members, per our earlier revelations in this work.
Intelligence experts believe that did include Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda’s leader who took the reigns after bin Laden’s reported demise and has been working with bin Laden’s son in Iran to wage jihad on global targets, as well and launder money and traffick opioids in the name of Allah. But recent works on al-Zawahiri place him in Pakistan, possibly Afghanistan and if those reports by journalists are correct, then he blew out of Iran years ago – but not before the U.S. had a chance to botch Intel and fail to search for him.
Given the evidence detailed in this work about the Osama bin Laden in Iran cover up, it seems hardly an intellectual stretch to consider the likelihood al-Zawahiri too had been using Iran as a terror and home base. Any solid investigator or analyst would conclude, based on the bin Laden evidence, al-Zawahiri has not been captured because the U.S. doesn’t want him caught. Or killed. Yet. If that is not true, can someone show me any evidence that the U.S. used its intelligence and diplomatic prowess to sweep Iran for this man? It simply was ignored.
There is a $25 million reward on al-Zawahiri just as there was for bin Laden. I hadn’t indeed pondered the al-Zawahiri intelligence until I received a phone call, I believe it was very late at night from an intelligence source who stated the U.S. government might be setting al-Zawahiri up for a “trophy kill” similar to what many folks believe was done with bin Laden when he was moved from Iran to Pakistan, and mere months later, he was killed.
“I just heard on CNN that the U.S. thinks al-Zawahiri is in Pakistan,” the source said. “That could be the kiss of death for al-Zawahiri. I wouldn’t be surprised if they pull a raid on him. He may have outlived his usefulness now with Trump in office. It’s not the same ballgame as it was under previous presidents.
“I am confident if it was leaked to CNN, it was done so for a reason.”
CNN on its own rarely breaks any stories of significance on national security. Perhaps it was just coincidence, or maybe the story was placed.
This was an interesting point, especially since there were no current events in play at the time in the news media involving al-Zawahiri or al-Qaeda — absent the anniversary of Sept. 11th. It was merely blurted out, for lack of better phrasing. And the liberal media usually does not come up with such content – especially high-level national security Intel linked to terrorism – if it wasn’t planted by someone “in the know” and for a specific reason.
I wanted to put this out in case al-Zawahiri ends up on the wrong end of a U.S.-led raid shortly. It certainly would fit the pattern employed to bring his mentor, bin Laden down just months after he arrived in Pakistan after approximately eight years using Iran as a base, according to our Intel assessments.
Back to Brennan.
Brennan, after leaving the CIA for a stint to head a private intelligence shop, returned to Obama’s White House to tackle counter-terrorism and national security. He reported directly to Obama, according to Intel insiders. Though he was not National Security Advisor, he performed as an NSA at large and wasn’t afraid to step on other’s toes when it came to providing analysis and new intelligence, intelligence insiders said. Brennan had his sights on the CIA director post and was running his own Intel Op from inside the White House, many times even usurping the U.S. intelligence apparatus.
When I was running security and anti-money laundering at Citi – this was often the exact behavior you would look for to pinpoint a fraudster. By Citi’s standards, Brennan would be the poster boy for a potential fraudster. Inside the White House, he answered to only Obama. He did what he pleased, talking to foreign governments, informants and dignitaries – operating not only as an Intel analysts at times but also a diplomat. With no checks and balances, Brennan was a runaway ox cart. He could have been conducting his own negotiations with foreign governments, usurped Intel agencies, and worked to shroud previous deals he hatched when he was running point for the CIA – on the ground – in places like Saudi Arabia. Where were the checks and balances? There were none.
At Citi, we would put an executive like this – and his boss or bosses – under investigation because the behavior was outside the corporate structure. It was a rogue set up, and to honest people paying close attention, it stands out as highly suspect and likely problematic. Management is management – whether corporate of government — and white collar banking crimes differ little from the foundations of political corruption.
Perhaps this is the very reason Brennan was put in this post by Obama, to operate like the president’s private CIA. Of course, in top-secret cables at the time Brennan is tagged as “PRESIDENTIAL ASSISTANT” to Obama. Do we really think Brennan was in the White House to fetch the president his lattes?
Before his White House stint, Brennan’s Intel pedigree included a resume of Middle Eastern Who’s Who: Director, National Counterterrorism Center; director, Terrorist Threat Integration Center; deputy executive director, CIA; chief of staff to director of central intelligence, CIA; chief of station, Middle East, CIA; executive assistant to the deputy director of central intelligence, CIA; deputy director, office of Near Eastern and South Asian analysis, CIA; daily intelligence briefer at the White House, CIA; deputy division chief, Office of Near Eastern and South Asian analysis, CIA; chief of analysis, DCI’s counterterrorism center, CIA; Middle East specialist and terrorism analyst, directorate of intelligence, CIA; political officer, U.S. Embassy in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, Department of State; and career trainee, directorate of operations, CIA.
That resume puts Brennan in Saudi Arabia in the employment of the CIA during the Sept. 11, 2001 terror bombing and during the time frame Osama bin Laden “vanished.”
And let’s not leave out where Brennan worked when he vacated the CIA before Obama’s election in return for big bucks to run the Analysis Corp., as president and chief executive. The company provides private analysis to the federal government’s counterterrorism efforts. Another pesky government contractor like Fusion GPS that at least under Brennan seemed to always be embroiled in controversy like Fusion GPS. It’s little wonder Brennan returned to the safe confines of federal government employment – where mistakes and homicides are suspicious deaths are brushed over and covered up without all these bothersome homicide detectives snooping around.
Case in point:
From True Pundit, with reporting from the Washington Times and The American Thinker:
A key witness in a federal probe into Barack Obama’s passport information stolen and altered from the State Department was gunned down and killed in front of a District church in D.C.
Lt. Quarles Harris Jr., 24, who had been cooperating with federal investigators, was found late at night slumped dead inside a car. He was reportedly waiting to meet with FBI agents about his boss John Brennan.
Back in March 2008, the State Department launched an investigation of improper computer access to the passport records of Barack Hussein Obama, and days later those of Hillary Clinton and John McCain. The investigation centered on one employee: a contract worker for a company that was headed by Brennan, a key Obama campaign adviser who later became assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. Ultimately Brennan was appointed CIA director.
First, Obama’s passport records were accessed and altered. Then days later — likely to provide cover — Brennan’s private Intel company accessed Clinton’s and McCain’s records as the State Department had already flagged the Obama breach by that time.
Brennan’s company accessed and altered Obama’s passport BEFORE the 2008 presidential election, while Brennan was also working on Obama’s campaign team. After the election, Brennan took a job inside the White House.
A month after the passport breach the key witness in this case was murdered. Harris was shot in the head in his car, in front of his church.
Lt. Harris told federal investigators before he was murdered that he received “passport information from a co-conspirator who works for the U.S. Department of State.” What became of the “co-conspirator”? Why wasn’t he/she brought to trial?
There is no way to tell what might have been done to Obama’s passport records by those who accessed them. Key information could have been altered or destroyed. On April 8, 2008, after the breach became public, Obama confessed to having taken a trip to Pakistan in 1981. The then-candidate said: “I traveled to Pakistan when I was in college.”
Journalist Jake Tapper was surprised and said:
“This last part — a college trip to Pakistan — was news to many of us who have been following the race closely. And it was odd that we hadn’t hear about it before, given all the talk of Pakistan during this campaign.”
Did Obama confess to this trip, which he doesn’t mention in either of his autobiographies, because of the passport breach?
Or did Brennan simply erase the trip from Obama’s passport records through his role as CEO of Intel contractor Analysis Corp, where Brennan worked between his CIA career and Obama’s White House on Brennan’s journey to CIA head?
Only Brennan’s employee Lt. Quarles Harris knows. And the FBI.
And dead men tell no tales. Especially in D.C. Just ask Seth Rich.
And the FBI cannot be trusted.
Unsolved murder in The Swamp.
Case closed.
Mystery, intrigue and backstabbing always seem to surround the Intel workings of Brennan, along with the propensity to always seemingly come down on the wrong side of issues when weighed against the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. criminal code. Internal cables and top secret memos, in fact, show Brennan to be a sympathizer with the Middle Eastern and Saudi plights and strong supporter of Islam.
“Brennan is never on the right side,” one well-placed intelligence official said. “He only advanced to the top because his bosses weren’t on the right side either and that includes Obama.”
Brennan, in a series of top-secret communications and conversations, from his White House post as Homeland Security Advisor to Obama, received actionable Intel on al-Qaeda and bin Laden years before his death. Yet, he did nothing to follow up on the information, documents and testimonies show.
Saudi Arabia Crown Prince Nayef bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud spoke directly to Brennan about bin Laden, his son, and al-Qaeda operating in Iran, according to well-placed intelligence officials and documents.
“At one point Saudi Prince Nayef was complaining to Brennan that the al-Qaeda terrorists that had been put in Iran were lashing out against Saudi targets and he was agitated,” a high-ranking intelligence official confessed. “He was not asking for help to try and get the Iranians to get better control of al-Qaeda, which was very strange because they would normally ask for help in that regard, especially since they lost control because al-Qaeda had grown so much in Iran.”
(I wasn’t aware “PRESIDENTAL ASSISTANTS” spoke directly to the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. I must have missed that in Mr. McGlynn’s U.S. Government class senior year in prep school.)
Prince Nayef at the time was listed in top-secret U.S. communications as “SAUDI INTERIOR MINISTER.“ Nayef served in that role through Oct. 2011 when he was promoted to Crown Prince. During the conversations with Brennan, Nayef was also Saudi Arabia’s Second Deputy Prime Mister in addition to spearheading the interior ministry. According to intelligence sources, the top secret memos involving Nayef and Brennan refer to the Saudi as “Saudi Second Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Interior.”
“These were conversations with Brennan and Nayef long before Osama bin Laden and members of his family were moved to Pakistan” before the U.S. raid in Abbottābad, Pakistan. “So bin Laden was still in Iran, and Nayef was angry that al-Qaeda was not following the ground rules of the arrangement they (Saudi Arabia and Iran) struck in 2001. There was a formal arrangement early in 2001 and an informal arrangement after 9/11.”
In a top-secret document detailing a conversation between Brennan and Nayef before bin Laden’s death, Nayef railed against the Iranians for violating an accord not to attack one another. The agreement was struck between the two nations in 2001 before the attacks on the World Trade Center and U.S. targets including the Pentagon by al-Qaeda, killing 3,000+ Americans.
Nayef complained to Brennan, per one cable in 2009 :
“Over the past two years Iran has hosted Saudis – including Osama bin Laden’s son who had contacts with terrorists and worked against the Kingdom (of Saudi Arabia.)”
Nayef continued, during another 2009 exchange, talking about Osama bin Laden himself grooming his son in Iran, to help run terror networks for al-Qaeda, according to intelligence sources who said that part of the conversations between Brennan and Nayef were redacted and later altered from top-secret documents between 2009 and 2011.
High-level intelligence sources said wording was often changed before top-secret correspondences were finalized, memorializing the exchanges between Brennan and Nayef and other officials in Middle Eastern countries. Often Brennan would speak Arabic, and when “Allah” was mentioned by either party during the conversations with Middle Eastern officials, including Saudi’s Nayef, the word would be changed to “God” in U.S. reports.
Saudi royalty spoke fluent English and Brennan spoke Arabic, so conversations floated in and out of both languages and included Brennan offering Middle Eastern officials the customary Muslim greeting “As-salāmu ʿalaykum,” which means “peace upon you;” and the response “wa ʿalaykumu s-salām,” which translates to “and peace be upon you.”
But those exchanges were edited out of transcripts, along with references to Osama bin Laden and references to high-level al-Qaeda operatives, intelligence sources confirm.
“Nayef was concerned with a breach by Iran where Iran agreed to not attack Saudi Arabia or the United States,” a high-level intelligence source said. “Nayef becomes the Crown Prince after his discussions with Brennan, this was the top man in Saudi Arabia venting that the Iranians were allowing bin Laden to groom his son to ramp up jihad on Saudi targets. He openly talked about this and Brennan agreed.”
Yet Brennan did nothing to address the bin Laden’s conducting al-Qaeda business in Iran or asking Nayef where they were in Iran so the United States could pursue them.
This was the Obama White House talking about bin Laden and al-Qaeda conducting terror operations in Iran after its deadly attacks on U.S. targets in 2001 and previously. And intelligence officials said it was not the only communication Brennan had with the Saudis from the White House that amounted to discussing the location of al-Qaeda personnel in Iran but failing to pursue these wanted criminals – or ask the Saudi for help to do so.
And these are merely a sampling of Brennan’s cables from inside the White House. Obtaining his communications during his tenure as CIA director – and long before that time, including his role as CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia during 2001 would prove more than interesting.
But wait, I thought the Saudis and Iranians hated each other, according to the slew of experts who seem to remind me of that daily? The two countries are supposedly on the opposite side of all significant issues in the Middle East. Isn’t that what critics and so-called scholars have preached how these two countries would never work together to shield al-Qaeda or its leaders? This is why scholars and experts can be easily manipulated into discounting reality – mistaking it for misinformation crafted by Deep State puppet masters.
Why until now had this gem of international terrorism Intel escaped all the experts for 17-plus years?
Just months ago, in March 2018, current Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman attacked Iran, alleging that Iran was harboring Osama bin Laden’s son and providing supporting as the new leader of al Qaeda.
Reuters News, another Deep-State controlled media arm, quickly tried to quell the story by citing the sheer impossibility of the Saudi Crown Prince’s ‘outrageous’ allegations.
Reuters tried to spin the story:
“Decades-old animosity between Sunni Muslim kingdom of Saudi Arabia and revolutionary Shi’ite Iran has deepened in recent years as the two sides wage proxy wars in the Middle East and beyond, including in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen.
Shi’ite Muslim Iran and strict Sunni militant group al Qaeda are natural enemies on either side of the Muslim world’s great sectarian divide. Yet intelligence veterans say that Iran, in pursuing its own ends, has in the past taken advantage of al Qaeda fighters’ need to shelter or pass through its territory.”
Really, Reuters?
Is that why Brennan’s name is on top-secret documents discussing bin Laden’s son living in Iran and running al-Qaeda? Reuters seemed to leave that part out.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said during an interview with CBS’ 60 Minutes accused Iran of indeed protecting al-Qaeda operatives, including numerous bin Laden relatives.
“This includes the son of Osama bin Laden, the new leader of al Qaeda. He lives in Iran and works out of Iran. He is supported by Iran,” the Saudi Crown Prince said.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry called the Crown Prince’s allegations a “big lie.”
Perhaps this helps shed needed light on why the new Saudi Prince jailed hundreds of the kingdom’s wealthiest political players and powerbrokers while consolidating his own power quickly after becoming Crown Prince. That included hammering the bin Laden family construction conglomerate that earned billions in profits under the Saudi flag.
Per Reuters:
Three Bin Laden brothers, senior executives in the family firm, were among more than 200 businessmen, royals and officials detained in November 2017 in an anti-corruption drive ordered by the prince. Bakr and two of his brothers, Saleh and Saad, eventually transferred their combined 36.2 percent stake in the family firm to the state in April 2018. Bakr, in his late 60s, is still in custody, although no charges have been made public.
On the night of Nov. 4, 2017, Saudi authorities detained Bakr bin Laden in Jeddah along with more than 200 other members of the Saudi elite, in what officials said was a crackdown on corruption. Dozens of Bin Laden family members, including the brothers’ children, had their bank accounts frozen and were banned from traveling abroad, said associates of the family. Brothers who were overseas at the time were recalled to the kingdom.
The purge affected royals, ministers and business leaders. The Bin Laden family’s hometown of Jeddah, once the economic capital of Saudi Arabia, was particularly hard hit. Many of the city’s merchant families had maintained close relationships with previous kings; few of them were spared in the crackdown.
The government publicly has not said precisely why the Bin Laden’s – or any of the other individuals caught up in the anti-corruption campaign – were detained. King Salman said at the time the purge was in response to “exploitation by some of the weak souls who have put their own interests above the public interest, in order to, illicitly, accrue money.”
(SIDE NOTE: Brennan had worked for the CIA as station chief in Jeddah in 2001, the hometown of the bin Laden clan).
“Prince bin Salman didn’t like what he learned after becoming Crown Prince,” a former U.S. intelligence official who worked in the Middle East with Brennan said. “Perhaps he tripped across these things you’re asking about between the (Saudi) Kingdom and Iran and that set him off. It sure seems like he was shot out of a cannon.”
In the same CBS interview, the Saudi Crown Prince doubled down on comparing Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini to Adolf Hitler.
”He wants to create his own project in the Middle East very much like Hitler, who wanted to expand at the time,” Prince Mohammed said. ”Many countries around the world and in Europe did not realize how dangerous Hitler was until what happened, happened. I don’t want to see the same events happening in the Middle East.”
Khameini, don’t forget, presided (or still presides) over the Committee of Nine – Iran’s unofficial board of directors that pinpoints targets and green lights terror strikes globally, per earlier intelligence revealed by Tom Orest in this work. Khameini was instrumental in striking the deal to house bin Laden and al-Qaeda in Iran, per Orest.
This is, quite possibly, more hard evidence to explain why Brennan has attacked Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed so viciously in recent weeks.
“Suddenly Brennan wants Saudi reforms,” one intelligence source said. “Reforms in the form of getting him private contracts with his old Saudi contacts who have little power now or to cover his ass if these things blow up.”
Or perhaps Brennan just wants to distract the Trump administration from investigating his role in the Bush and Obama CIA, as well as the Obama White House — and what role he played in working to hammer out what would appear to be a very troubling treaty with the Saudis and Iranians to protect terrorists with the “hands-off” approval of the U.S. intelligence apparatus whose leaders boast and profess how tirelessly their plebes are working to capture the very radical Islamic terrorists they have cut deals behind the Middle Eastern curtain to protect.
If that deceit doesn’t teeter on or constitute outright Treason, nothing does.
Keep in mind, well-placed intelligence officials and analysts point out, Brennan never did go out of his way to share the information about the bin Laden family – or any individual or entity — running al-Qaeda inside Iran’s borders. And still, no one in the federal government lifted a finger to not only try to extract bin laden from Iran but even seek details on his location from Saudi officials, including Nayef.
However, fast forward a decade, and the documents recovered during the Navy SEAL raid of bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan produced documents showing bin Laden’s sons were living in Iran for years. And relative confirmed this as well. The CIA is withholding hundreds of thousands of documents that will likely never be declassified, including details or evidence linking the boys’ father to Iran.
“You’ll never see these materials,” one FBI agent said. “They wouldn’t even let the FBI or the (FBI) lab examine that stuff (recovered from bin Laden’s compound). Brennan locked it all away when he became CIA director.”
Are we to believe bin Laden’s sons – who were with him when his Pakistan compound was raided in 2011 – were not with their father before the terror chief was relocated from Iran in late 2010. Where were his sons then? Even Brennan and Nayef discussed the bin Laden father and son in Iran, per previous revelations in this chapter. U.S. officials said during the raid on bin Laden in Pakistan one son – 23-yr-old Khalid — was gunned down and killed. The other – 20-yr-old Hamza — reportedly escaped when the SEALs stormed the house, according to the U.S. reports of the military operation. Why would the sons be residing with their father in Pakistan, but not Iran? In the mid-2000s, Hamza was 14 and Khalid 17 yrs old. Where did they live, if not with their father? Osama bin Laden’s brothers attest the sons were raised in Iran.
In a bizarre move, intelligence insiders who are familiar with Brennan’s top secret communications, said specific mentions of bin Laden’s son in Iran linked to al-Qaeda labeled the boy as Ibrahim bin Laden, instead of Hamza bin Laden.
“Big problem because Ibrahim would have been about five years old,” one well-placed Intel insider said. “He wasn’t running a major terrorist operation. Not yet.”
But his older brother was just 20 years old. Was Hamza’s name removed from U.S. cables to shield his identity and connection to al-Qaeda or was the mention of his brother Ibrahim in his place merely an error? And why and how did Hamza escape from his father’s compound the night of the U.S. raid? There are mixed reports of course. U.S. officials maintain Hamza was at the house. Pakistani ISI confirms he was not at the residence during the strike.
Now Hamza dubbed the “Crown Prince of Terror,” remains elusive like his father.
Think of the utter absurdity and sheer irony fueled by bureaucratic stupidity. The United States classified Hamza as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist in January 2017, effectively blacklisting him and branding him an international fugitive. Yet he was left in Iran alone – unfettered by the United States for a decade — to help rebuild and lead al-Qaeda under the tutelage of his father, Osama bin Laden, and his radical inner circle.
Scholars and journalists have afforded too much weight on the U.S. government’s bin Laden archives — troves of documents that fail to mention even the possibility bin Laden was in Iran after 9/11. Experts and authors often cite bin Laden’s letters to family members as proof of his travels. But these letters and writings were released by the CIA years after they were reportedly grabbed during the 2011 raid on his house in Pakistan. Thousands more were released in 2017, six years after his death, including a video of Hamza bin Laden’s wedding.
As journalists and investigators – and even common-sense analysts – are we to believe ‘evidence’ released by the CIA in a slow-drip format over the years? I certainly don’t. To shed some needed light here, I knew folks and worked with folks who can fabricate any document in the world, and they are in the employment of the federal government’s Intel apparatus. And researchers and journalists et al. who believe bin Laden documents released by the feds to be true and correct are beyond help. Do you think the CIA would release any material from its troves of unreleased materials on bin Laden indicating he was in Iran? If anything the Agency and the FBI – along with the State Dept. have gone to extreme lengths to quash any notion of it.
I read the books by scholars and journalists about bin Laden’s travels after 9/11 in 2001 from writers versed much more than myself in the war on terrorism, and almost all use the data supplied by the U.S. government as a backbone for their research and Intel. That is undoubtedly flawed, from an insider’s perspective. Why would the Deep State hand over evidence to incriminate itself? And there is little mention in previous literary works, if any, linking bin Laden to living in Iran. And no mention of the U.S. government burying Intel about it and targeting whistleblowers. That is the danger of journalists writing inside a government-sourced echo chamber and regurgitating the same data points while adding their own creative flair and insights. There are massive holes left in all the “official” narratives. Perhaps this work, while indeed not gospel or infallible, will help fill the gaps
Even the wedding video of Hamza bin Laden, released last year by the CIA, contained little information about where and when it was filmed, and it is doubtful the entire video was released. Yet Intel folks I tapped to examine the video said it was clearly shot in Iran, even though the Agency failed to disclose that pertinent fact.
But the bin Laden patriarch wasn’t in Iran, where all his sons were? According to who, the CIA and loyal jihadists trying to protect al-Qaeda’s founder?
Meanwhile, Brennan and the U.S. never lifted a finger to hunt, find and extract either bin Laden. But now, the U.S. is suddenly interested in apprehending him? You could not make this stuff up if you tried. It is either wild ineptness or a nefarious plot to aid and abet terrorism.
Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Lt. Gen. Robert P. Ashley told members of the Senate in March that al Qaeda “remains a serious and persistent threat to U.S. interests worldwide,” and in South Asia, “retained the intent and limited capability to threaten coalition and Afghan forces and interests in the region.”
Unless you have actionable intelligence against bin Laden – any bin Laden – in Iran.
Internal communications indeed show Brennan seemed much more interested in discussing the tenets of Islam with Saudi Arabia and Middle Eastern officials — and how radical terrorists disparaged the religion’s image, according to intelligence insiders directly involved with Brennan’s White House cables and communications.
“What kind of presidential homeland security advisor ignores intelligence on high-value terrorist targets from the Middle East and Osama bin Laden?” a former White House official asked. “Brennan is discussing and praising Islam with the Saudi Arabian government, with Jordan and many others.”
Often Brennan would speak Arabic, and when “Allah” was mentioned by either party during the conversations with Middle Eastern officials, including Saudi’s Nayef, the word would be changed to “God” in U.S. reports. And omitted from reports were Brennan’s customary Muslim greeting “As-salāmu ʿalaykum,” and the response “wa ʿalaykumu s-salām,” with Middle Eastern dignitaries.
If these were merely cultural niceties, why delete them from the record, top-secret or not? Why conceal such exchanges?
Intelligence official said Brennan’s cables from inside the White House were usually sent to the the Secretary of State, CIA, National Security Counsel, and various embassies and consulates depending on the content.
“No one expects to see the word “Allah” coming from a U.S. official in a Secret—NOFORN (document),” one intelligence insider said. (Secret—NOFORN is a type of document classification which labels the document as secret, and the information cannot be shared with foreign nationals.)
One such direct example is extracted from confidential communications from Brennan’s White House post in an exchange with Saudi leaders in 2009 – again – two years before the raid on bin Laden.
Saudi Official to Brennan: “We’ve achieved many things in protecting the country and Allah willing, we will achieve many more things with our friends.”
“Allah” was swapped out for “God” in U.S. correspondences.
Brennan in the same exchange: “I wish other countries in the world were as willing and capable. Saudi Arabia is on the front line of terrorism and a model in preventing individuals from being corrupted by the propaganda of al-Qaeda and instrumental in demonstrating to the West and U.S. that al-Qaeda was a perversion of Islam and did not represent the true faith.”
Brennan is more concerned with the portrayal of Islam in the United States that he is about pursuing bin Laden, his son, and al-Qaeda – and protecting Americans from their terror regime. Brennan is an ambassador of Islam’s “true faith,” and this is where his focus was while he was sitting next to Obama in the White House – and later as CIA chief.
For years there have been numerous rumors about Brennan’s conversion to Islam among CIA hierarchy and in intelligence sources. Even dopey and feckless Snopes.com was deployed to help quell such rumors and without any proof – Snopes concluded Brennan is not a practicing Muslim. Wow, that was easy. But his cables, speeches, and communications with Middle Eastern envoys indicate the opposite.
Throughout the research for this book, I keep asking myself why the U.S. government would fail time and time again to follow credible leads on bin Laden. I keep arriving at sinister and troubling motivations. I picked the brain of one cleric versed in Islam. He ended formulated an astonishing hypothesis I had failed to ponder.
“Have you ever pondered that Brennan was obligated to help bin Laden, to aid bin Laden no matter what the cost was to the United States?” he asked. “It’s the rule of Islam to go against and crush the kafir above anything else, except Mohammed. Brennan may have had little choice according to his beliefs.” READ MORE:
Reprinted from Thomas Paine’s How We Dismatled the FBI in Our Pajamas
Listen to the insightful Thomas Paine Podcast Below --