Is Obama Considering Releasing the World Trade Center Bomber?

Is Obama Considering Releasing the World Trade Center Bomber?

By Bobby Eberle September 20, 2012 7:13 am
This is absolutely unbelievable. Americans were yet again the victims of terrorist actions in Libya, and it is clear that attacks were coordinated and calculated. But now we learn that another terrorist, the one responsible for the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center is a candidate for possible release by the Obama administration.


He is known as the Blind Sheikh, but his real name is Omar Abdel-Rahman. If that name sounds vaguely familiar, it should. Here’s the report from The Washington Times:

The Obama administration is reportedly in talks with Egypt’s government to transfer convicted terrorist Omar Abdel-Rahman back to his home country. This would be a major foreign-policy blunder and an insult to the counterterrorism professionals who put the terror leader behind bars.

Rahman, known as the “Blind Sheikh,” was the leader of the terrorist group Al-Gama’a al-Islamiya, which conducted a series of attacks in Egypt in the early 1990s. Rahman was in exile in New York at the time, preaching at mosques, fundraising, building a radical following and conspiring to create mayhem in America. Rahman and nine of his acolytes were arrested after the February 1993 World Trade Center bombing. In 1996, he was sentenced to life in prison for his part in the plot.

Securing Rahman’s freedom is a cause celebre among Islamists. The “Abdel Rahman Brigades” have mounted a series of attacks in his name in Libya and may have motivated the Sept. 11 murder of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. The Blind Shiekh’s family organized the demonstration outside the U.S. embassy in Cairo on the same day during which a mob breached the embassy perimeter, tore down the American flag and raised the black banner of jihad. The pre-planned event was billed as, “The real terrorist — America or Omar Abdel Rahman?”

Can this really be happening? Several members of the U.S. House think so. In a letter to Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Eric Holder, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith along with seven others stated their concern about the possible release of Abdel-Rahman.

While considerations regarding the blind sheikh’s release would be disturbing in any context, they are particularly alarming given recent events. The 11th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks was marked by the assassination of America’s ambassador to Libya and an attack on the U.S. Embassy in Egypt. The violence in Egypt has been attributed, in part, to that government’s demands for the blind sheikh’s release.

Succumbing to the demands of a country whose citizens threaten our embassy and the Americans serving in it would send a clear message that acts of violence will be responded to with appeasement rather than strength. The blind sheikh should remain in federal prison.

The release of Abdel-Rahman or any terrorist who plots to kill innocent Americans would be seen for what it is — a sign of wekness and lack of resolve by the Untied States and its President.

As reported at Front Page Magazine, “On September 10, the day before terrorists assaulted the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, Abdel-Rahman’s terrorist organization demanded the release of the Blind Sheikh and all detainees in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.” In addition, it appears talks have been going on for some time regarding the release of this terrorist:

The Arabic language newspaper al-Arabiya reported more than six months ago that the Obama administration offered to send Abdel-Rahman to Egypt as part a prisoner swap. Called the “Emir of Jihad” by some, Abdel-Rahman is a spiritual leader to al Qaeda and other militant Islamist groups. He would almost certainly be hailed on his return to Egypt as a conquering hero for attacking America, the “Great Satan.”

This is Barack Obama’s response to terror and violence around the world? The possible release of a known, convicted terrorist? This man can’t be reelected! He should not have been elected in the first place.