Category Archives: Middle East
From 1389 Blog
Their rationale (not making this up), because “Islam is a religion of tolerance and peace” people who insult it must be killed.
Kuwait’s parliament approved a law imposing the death penalty on any Muslim who insults God, his prophets, messengers, Prophet Mohammad’s wives or the Koran, in any form of expression, if they don’t repent.
The bill, which adds articles to Kuwait’s penal code, was passed today by 40 lawmakers, including all Cabinet ministers present, and rejected by five Shiite Muslims as well as one liberal lawmaker.
“Islam is a religion of tolerance, peace and acceptance, but that doesn’t mean it should be stepped on,” lawmaker Ali al-Deqbasi told the house before the vote. AbdulHamid Dashti, who voted against the bill, said the law “should be broadened to criminalize those who insult all beliefs and faiths.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the Lord of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.
9 Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.
16 And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.
Revelation 17: 13-14
13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.
14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
By Alan Caruba
# ‘Challenging moment with great risks’…
# Obama ‘not bluffing’ over military threat…
# Netanyahu: ‘Red line’…
# TOP GENERAL: Nuclear Iran will trigger arms race in Middle East…
# Kissinger: Nuke crisis close…
# NKOREA: NO MORE CEASEFIRE…
# Russia conducts largest nuclear drill in 20 years…
And he’s going to head the CIA? Never mind he was responsible for the administration scrubbing all references to jihad and Islam from government documents on terrorism.
A bit of news early in John Brennan’s testimony. Former CIA official Michael Scheuer has charged that Brennan, as chief of the CIA station in Saudi Arabia during the late 1990s, convinced the Clinton administration not to attempt an operation to capture Osama bin Laden. Asked by Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) whether that story is true, Brennan said it was.
“Based on what I had known at the time,” he said, “I didn’t think it was a worthwhile operation and had low chances of success.”
He was not in the chain of command and had no control over decisions made in Washington — Clinton national security adviser Sandy Berger ordered the operation cancelled. Brennan said he had “no second thoughts whatsoever … chances of success were minimal” and it was likely that “other individuals were going to be killed.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
mooslim Shit Heads Trying to Brain Wash America Into Thinking islam is “Nice”…What an Evil Bucket of Pure Shit
CAIR’s latest publicity stunt to get more of their executives on TV, newspapers etc.
If people wanted to experience real jihad they could go live with Christians in Nigeria where they are shot and hacked to pieces on a daily basis by radical Islamists.
SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) — Buses in San Francisco are carrying messages of jihad, but it’s not what you might think. It’s a campaign to educate residents about the real meaning of the word. It’s a campaign that began in Chicago and has now reached the Bay Area.
One statement on the side of a Muni bus reads: “My jihad is to stay fit despite my busy schedule. What’s yours?”
It’s part of an educational campaign created by CAIR — the Council on American-Islamic Relations. The group has put 35 ads on buses rolling through the streets of San Francisco.
“The intention of the campaign is to educate our fellow Americans about what the word jihad means,” said Zahra Billoo, the executive director of the Bay Area office for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. She said, “A common misconception of the word jihad is that it means armed struggle or holy war and that is something that has been perpetrated by many who’ve made careers out of pushing anti-Muslim sentiment.”
We asked some Muni riders if they knew the definition of jihad. Most of the answers we got were “a religious war” and “a holy war”.
Miriam Webster also defines it as a holy war, but it lists a second definition — one that Billoo says is much more appropriate.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
From Wirecutter: http://ogdaa.blogspot.com/
No wonder Obama is so eager to be friends with the Islamist dictator Mohamed Morsi. They are both masters of the bait and switch tactic. Morsi duped the willfully gullible into thinking he was something other than Egypt’s Ruhollah Khomeini. Obama pulled this:
The top-ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee accused President Obama of pulling a “bait and switch” this week with the administration’s proposed deal to avert the so-called “fiscal cliff.”
“What [Obama] proposed this week was a classic bait and switch on the American people — a tax increase double the size of what he campaigned on, billions of dollars in new stimulus [i.e., patronage] spending and an unlimited, unchecked authority to borrow from the Chinese,” Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said in Saturday’s weekly GOP address.
Obama has made it obvious to anyone paying attention that he fully intends to go over the cliff — unless of course Republicans accede to his every demand, no matter how detrimental to the economy.
If Congress fails to act within the next 30 days, a bevy of tax increases and severe spending cuts are set to go into effect, potentially unleashing a devastating blow to the precarious U.S. economy.
“If we don’t act by the end of the year, 28 million more families and individuals will be forced to pay the Alternative Minimum Tax, 21 times as many farmers and ranchers will be hit with the death tax, and the average middle-class family would see their taxes go up by at least $2,000,” Hatch said.
Obviously we are going to have to pay the piper sooner or later. You can’t let a Marxist punk flush $trillions that we don’t have down the toilet, reelect him, and then expect there not to be economic agony.
The objective is to make sure Republicans get blamed for the pain, despite being the only ones to attempt to avoid it. Given that the Obama Regime and the “mainstream” media are in effect the same entity, this should be child’s play.
Tip and graphic compliments of Zappatrust.
College Professor – Dr. Jonathan Matusitz – Explains Why The US Government Does Not Call Terrorism By Its Name
Found at Blazing Cat Fur
The real war on women.
Via Daily Mail:
Egypt’s ruling party is paying gangs of thugs to sexually assault women protesting in Cairo’s Tahrir Square against President Mohamed Morsi, activists said.
They also said the Muslim Brotherhood is paying gangs to beat up men who are taking part in the latest round of protests, which followed a decree by President Morsi to give himself sweeping new powers.
Around 200,000 people gathered yesterday in Tahrir Square, the heart of last year’s revolution which toppled President Hosni Mubarak.
Large marches from around Cairo flowed into the square, chanting ‘Constitution: Void!’ and The people want to bring down the regime.’
But amid the calls for democracy a sinister threat has emerged.
Magda Adly, the director of the Nadeem Centre for Human Rights, said that under Mubarak, the Government paid thugs to beat male protestors and sexually assault women.
‘This is still happening now,’ she told The Times. ‘I believe thugs are being paid money to do this … the Muslim Brotherhood have the same political approaches as Mubarak,’ she said.
One protestor, Yasmine, told the newspaper how she had been in the square filming the demonstrations for a few hours when the crowd suddenly turned.
Before she knew what was happening, about 50 men had surrounded her and began grabbing her breasts. She said they ripped off her clothes, starting with her headscarf and for nearly an hour, indecently assaulted her with their hands.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Islamist-Written Constitution That Allows Slavery, Criminalizes Blasphemy, Doesn’t Protect Christians…
I’m sure if Israel decided it was going to allow slavery the Obama administration would remain silent.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration is declining to criticize Egypt’s draft constitution despite spirited internal debate over whether the document adequately protects women, religious minorities and dissenting voices.
State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland lamented the lack of consensus in Egypt’s constitution-writing process. She says how people in Egypt view the draft is most important.
If Egypt’s President Mohammed Morsi approves the constitution, it goes to a national referendum.
Nuland’s restraint didn’t reflect the views of all in the administration.
U.S. officials said there were internal debates over whether to criticize the draft constitution for limiting freedom of expression, failing to grant freedom of worship, criminalizing blasphemy and eroding women’s rights guarantees.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly about internal deliberations.
Here are just a few of the articles and omissions that should have been a no-brainer to condemn.
CAIRO (AP) — An Islamist-dominated panel is voting on Egypt’s draft constitution, the country’s first charter after the uprising that toppled Hosni Mubarak. The draft largely reflects the conservative vision of the Islamists, with articles that rights activists, liberals and Christians fear will lead to restrictions on the rights of women and minorities and civil liberties in general.
Omissions of certain articles, such as bans on slavery or promises to adhere to international rights treaties, were equally worrying to critics of the new draft, who pulled out from the panel before the vote.
Here are some of the disputed articles:
- As in past constitutions, the new draft says that the “principles of Islamic law” will be the basis of law. Previously, the term “principles” allowed wide leeway in interpreting Shariah. But in the draft, a separate new article is added that seeks to define “principles” by pointing to particular theological doctrines and their rules. That could give Islamists the tool for insisting on stricter implementation of rulings of Shariah.
- A new article states that Egypt’s most respected Islamic institution, Al-Azhar, must be consulted on any matters related to Shariah, a measure critics fear will lead to oversight of legislation by clerics.
- An article underlines that the state will protect “the true nature of the Egyptian family … and promote its morals and values,” phrasing that is vague and suggests state control over the contents of such arts forms as books and films.
- The draft contains no article specifically establishing equality between men and women because of disputes over the phrasing. However, it maintains that a woman must balance her duties toward family and outside work, suggesting that she can be held accountable if her public role conflicts with her family duties. No such article is mentioned for men.
- An article bans insulting or defaming the prophet and messengers, but is vague about what constitutes an insult, raising concerns of restrictions to freedom of expression.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Found at The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
Mohamed Morsi declared that any laws or decrees he’s made since he took office June 30, and any made before a new constitution is put in place, are final and cannot be overturned or appealed. Angry protesters filled the streets of Cairo, and set fire to several Muslim Brotherhood offices around the country.
Hey…you voted for a radical Islamist, just like we did, in the United States. You get the government you deserve.
CNN Morsi also declared that a 100-man council drafting a new constitution, plus the upper house of parliament, cannot be dissolved. He granted the council two more months to finish a draft constitution, meaning the panel has six months to finish. That means Morsi, who this year took over legislative powers from the military council that ruled after Hosni Mubarak’s ouster, could have at least six months of unchecked rule by decree. The draft constitution would go to a referendum before it is finalized.
Morsi’s moves come three days after the start of violent protests in central Cairo, largely by people angry at Morsi’s government and the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist movement to which Morsi belongs. There also is turmoil in the constitution panel, which has been torn between conservatives wanting the constitution to mandate that Egypt be governed by Islam’s Sharia law and moderates and liberals who don’t.
More proof that we are right and we are righteous, and that our ads, despite the bloody howls from evildoers and the useful idiots in their service, are essential. We hit a nerve. And why? Because the enemedia so furiously spins an anti-human, anti-goodness narrative that the truth is a shock to the senses. But good people respond to it. Applaud it. Want it. Which is why we were able to raise the money to take the campaign nationwide. From San Francisco to NY, DC, Portland, Chicago, Denver …. you made that happen.
This is how you change the culture and the narrative. This is how you defeat the forces of evil in the information battle-space. This is how you begin to win.
Just for knowing, these ads are currently running on 100 NYC buses, Washington, DC lit platforms, and Portland buses. And we are in the process of buying other cities. We have new, similar initiatives in the planning stages. Hamas groups in America like CAIR may have millions from their foreign agents to conduct their crushing anti-freedom war, but we have something they will never have: a love of freedom, a love of life and an iron will. We will never give up, we will never give in, we will never surrender. We will defeat these forces of evil.
BTW, the city of Chapel Hill, North Carolina still refuses to run our pro-Israel ad (above) while running vicious anti-semitic, anti-Israel ads. What a disgusting little town.
Israel Vs. Hamas is Civilization Vs. SavageryIBDEditorial.com (thanks to Joan)
Mideast: Celebration within Gaza after the bombing of a bus filled with innocent Israeli civilians is an object lesson on the so-called Palestine question. Those who would celebrate such a cowardly act are savages.
No one can imagine Washington’s troops firing shots to celebrate a supporter of American independence trying to kill a group of Royalist civilians. During the Cold War, U.S. support for Lech Walesa’s Solidarity would have dried up if he handed out candy after a Polish nationalist targeted, say, innocent Muscovites going to work.
We may live in a complex world, but evil is identifiable even when its practitioners claim their cause is good.
The gunfire across Gaza celebrating an explosion on a bus in central Tel Aviv on Wednesday is evil. And the Iranian-backed Hamas’ rulers praising the bombing, which injured 15 passengers, is evil.
“Hamas blesses the attack in Tel Aviv and sees it as a natural response to the Israeli massacres … in Gaza,” Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters.
The “Israeli massacres,” i.e. self-defensive airstrikes, are exactly how the U.S. would react if, let’s say, Mexico were doing to us what Hamas has been doing to Israel: firing hundreds of rockets into populated areas.
It is, in fact, what any civilized nation would be doing.
But only barbarians would hand out cakes in celebration of the bombing of a vehicle with innocent men, women and children, which was happening at Gaza’s main hospital on Wednesday. “Go back to Germany, Poland, Russia, America and anywhere else,” Hamas’ al-Qassam brigades warned Jews on Twitter.
Hamas’ al-Aqsa TV, run by a Palestinian parliament member, is already notorious, encouraging children to become terrorists, as when it depicted a 4-year-old girl holding an explosive, singing of killing Israeli soldiers as a suicide bomber. On Wednesday, the channel’s news reader prayed “to Allah the exalted that we see body bags in a short while” and joyfully reported that “the morale of Gaza residents is in the sky right now.”
As Chaim Weizmann, Israel’s first president, wrote over 60 years ago, “The real opponents of Zionism can never be placated by any diplomatic formula: Their objection to the Jews is that the Jews exist, and in this particular case, that they exist in Palestine.”
Arthur James Balfour, author of the 1917 Balfour Declaration supporting a Jewish homeland, in 1904 as British prime minister was humming another tune, crusading against Jewish immigration into Britain.
But, as Conor Cruise O’Brien observed, even Balfour came to appreciate the “tremendous Jewish contribution” to the world, and ultimately saw “a Jewish Palestine as the focus for a new blaze of human creativity, a new enrichment of the culture of the world.”
Then, as now, Israel represented civilization. Its Arab enemies dependably exemplify its bloodthirsty opposite.
Found at American Power Blog
Forget charging up a hill. Armies charge up the slippery slope of the moral high ground and they don’t try to capture it from the enemy, because that would be the surest way to lose the moral high ground, instead they claim the moral high ground by refusing to try and capture it, to establish their moral claim to the moral high ground, which they can’t have because they refuse to fight for it.
Israel has been engaged in a long drawn out struggle for the moral high ground. The moral high ground is to the modern Israel what the land of Israel was to their pioneer ancestors who drained swamps, built roads and shot bandits; some of whom were later discovered to be the oppressed peoples of the region, fresh from Syria or Jordan, and protesting the settlements built on that stretch of swamp that had been set aside in their revisionist history as belonging to their great-grandparents, complete with oversized house keys to some of the choicer logs in the swamp.
Sadly the only way to win the moral high ground is by losing. Just look at the massive Arab armies who repeatedly invaded Israel, did their best to overwhelm it with the best Soviet iron that the frozen factories of the Ural could turn out, and lost the bid to drive the Jews into the sea, but won the moral high ground. Then their terrorist catspaws spent decades winning the moral high ground by hijacking airplanes full of civilians, murdering Olympic athletes and pushing old men in wheelchairs from the decks of cruise ships.
All these killing sprees accomplished absolutely nothing useful, aside from the killing of Jews, which to a certain sort of mind is a useful thing in and of itself, but that failure won the terrorist catspaws the moral high ground. Their failure to win a war by hijacking buses full of women and taking the children of a school hostage conclusively established their moral superiority and nobility of spirit.
The world was deeply moved when Arafat waddled up to the UN podium, with his gun, wearing a mismatched cotton rag on his head that would decades hence become the modish apparel of every third hipster standing in line with a can of 20 dollar fair trade Lima beans at Whole Foods, because his commitment to killing people in a failed cause that even he didn’t believe in exchange for money from his backers in the Muslim world showed his deep commitment to the moral high ground.
The father of an Israeli soldier told his son after he was called up for duty that he would rather visit him in prison than visit him in the cemetery. “If you are fired on, fire back.” That is good advice not just for that young man, but for his entire country, and for the civilized world. It is better to fire than be fired upon. It is better to be thought a criminal, than mourned in Holocaust museums. It is better to leave the moral high ground to those who worship the romance of endless bloodshed and defeat. It is better to lose the peace and win the war.
Read it all at Sultan Knish: http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/
And Gaffney, who leftists constantly attack as a “racist” and a “neocon,” isn’t the only one. Check the Los Angeles Times, “Gaza conflict threatens Obama’s plans for Mideast diplomacy“:
WASHINGTON — The increasingly bloody conflict between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip is threatening the Obama administration’s plans to reinvigorate its Middle East diplomacy, creating new obstacles across the region as the president prepares for his second term.
With negotiators struggling to craft a cease-fire agreement, diplomats and experts say the strife is hampering administration efforts to help resolve the civil war in Syria, improve relations with Egypt’s new government, support moderate Palestinian leaders and check Iran’s growing ambitions.
In a region thrown into turmoil by the “Arab Spring” uprisings, U.S. support for Israel and its right to defend itself has been one of the few constants. That has not changed, despite the well-publicized rocky relationship between President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
But by all accounts, the damage to U.S. influence in the region is likely to grow if Israel sends ground troops into Gaza to stop the Hamas militant group from firing rockets into Israel.
“The bottom line is that this will poison everything the United States is trying to do in the region,” said Shadi Hamid, research director at the Brookings Institution’s Doha Center in Qatar.
President Obama has spoken repeatedly with leaders in Israel and Egypt, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has spoken with other officials while she and Obama went ahead with a visit to Thailand, Myanmar and Cambodia that was intended to emphasize the administration’s efforts to refocus U.S. foreign policy on Asia.
Ben Rhodes, the president’s deputy national security advisor, told reporters on the trip that the U.S. position is that “those nations in the region, particularly nations that have influence over Hamas, and that’s principally Egypt and Turkey, also Qatar… that those nations need to use that influence to de-escalate the conflict. And de-escalation has to begin with, again, an end to rocket fire from Gaza.”
U.S. officials don’t have direct contact with Hamas, which they consider a terrorist organization.
Daniel Kurtzer, a former U.S. ambassador to both Israel and Egypt, said the crisis appeared close to a tipping point. If Israel sends armored columns into Gaza, Washington would be caught between pressing Israel to stop a conflict that has Obama’s support, or being seen in the Arab world as complicit in the bloodshed.
“We will be put in the same corner as Israel,” said Kurtzer, now with Princeton University. “This will be an extremely awkward position.”
While U.S. officials have sought to avoid judging Israeli tactics, Obama said at a news conference Sunday in Bangkok, Thailand, that it was preferable for Israel to avoid sending troops into Gaza, for the sake of both Palestinians and Israelis.
Washington has struggled to regain its influence in the Middle East since the Arab Spring uprisings of 2011 brought to power populist Islamist governments that are more wary of Washington and more responsive to pro-Palestinian public opinion.
Jeez, you’d think Baracky built some creds with his Middle East apology tour? Folks sure thought that Cairo speech was da bomb, IYKWIMAITYD!
The day of reckoning is here thanks, in part to GOP strategists having made Obama’s Islamic radicalism a subject nearly as off-limits as Islamic supremacism. So along comes Hamas. Just days before the presidential election, the terrorist organization — begotten by the Brotherhood and serving as its Palestinian branch — spearheaded an Islamist offensive, firing in just a few days over
120 750+ rockets into the Jewish state from its home base in Gaza.
Angel drawing from coffeeandsleeplessnights.wordpress.com
National Review (By Andrew McCarthy) You may not have heard about it until a few days after the election. Like Iran’s act of war in shooting at a U.S. drone in international waters, it signaled a further dangerous unraveling of the Middle East that undercut the media narrative of Obama as foreign-policy chess master, so it was tucked under the rug.
But it could not be ignored forever, for it is not just another spike in the ever-thrumming Gaza border skirmish. It is the renewal of an unending war — an existential one for Israel, which is expected to fight “proportionately,” with both hands tied behind its back, yet blithely accept, as the international community has, the barbaric Islamist claim that nothing short of Israel’s destruction will be satisfactory.
By its own declaration, Hamas will be at war with Israel until the latter’s demise. Toward that end, the jihad has now been taken to population centers such as Tel Aviv.
By the calculation of terrorism analyst Ryan Mauro, the onslaught begun last week brought the yearly total of missile attacks on Israel to about 700. That is,while the Obama administration has been facilitating the Muslim Brotherhood’s rise in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and soon Syria — with Obama drawing ever closer to Turkey’s Islamist prime minister, Recep Erdogan, even as Erdogan champions and funds Hamas — Gaza’s jihadists have been emboldened to step up their terror campaign.
And it is not just Gaza’s jihadists. Understand: This is not Hamas’s war of extermination against Israel. It is Islam’s. And yes, for the millionth time, there are various ways of interpreting Islam, but the Islam that matters in the Middle East, the Islam that animates tens of millions of Muslims, is Islamic supremacism. Israel, the canary in the West’s coal mine, is not besieged by an eccentric doctrine weaved by Hamas, Hezbollah, and al-Qaeda. Jihadist terrorists are just the point of the ideological spear.
Recent polling shows that four in five Egyptians (i.e., about 60 million people) believe the Camp David Accords — the treaty that has kept peace between Egypt and Israel for 30 years — should be dissolved. It is the same four out of five Egyptians that, given the chance, voted to put Islamists in control of their government. Just as Muslims have chosen to empower Islamists in Turkey, Gaza, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Tunisia, as well as in Lebanon and Libya to a lesser but still consequential extent.
The jihad against Israel “isn’t a matter of individuals, not a matter of community. It is a matter of a nation. The Arab nation, the Islamic nation.” So exclaimed Egyptian prime minister Hisham Qandil on Thursday in Gaza. He had been sent there to show solidarity with Hamas by Mohamed Morsi, the Brotherhood leader elected as president. “We’re all behind you,” Qandil continued — behind “the struggling nation . . . that is presenting its children as heroes every day.”
This is how the Middle East’s Muslims see the situation. They are not Palestinians, Egyptians, Saudis, Iraqis, and so on. They are the ummah, the “Islamic nation.” For them, Gaza is not a regional dustup over parochial grievances. It is a civilizational struggle to be fought to the finish — the finish being when Israel is eliminated.
We used to fight wars that way, too. The fact that we’ve decided total victory by force of arms is a quaint concept does not mean everybody else has. Islamists define victory in the Middle East as the annihilation of Israel. That is the ambition of the region, not just Hamas. Our government’s decades-old claim that the aggression results from a “perversion of Islam” weaved by a fringe of “violent extremists” is dangerously delusional.
Delusion, of course, is nothing new. For 30 years, ever since the Carter administration hailed Ayatollah Khomeini as a “saint,” willful blindness has been the order of the day. It induced the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations to insist that Islam was a “religion of peace” even as scripture-citing Islamists repeatedly mass-murdered Americans. But Barack Obama is something else again. This president has supplanted conscious avoidance of our enemies’ ideology with empathy. Our government no longer just ignores Islamist goals; it affirmatively empowers Islamist factions.
It has been only eleven days, but we’re already seeing the wages of November 6. The world has become a much more dangerous place, and not just for Israelis.
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
It’s almost like he’s afraid of the truth coming out.
If Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid didn’t make it clear enough to Republicans that he opposes a select committee to investigate the Benghazi attacks, he said it again Friday: No way.
In letters to key Republican senators, Reid put his foot down – again – on a special panel to dig into the Sept. 11 assault that killed U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and three diplomatic aides. A select committee would need a floor vote to be created, and Reid said he wouldn’t permit it.
Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte have led the charge for a special committee in recent days; there is also support for the idea in the House. Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.) fired off a similar request to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) earlier this week, but Boehner said he didn’t believe a new panel was necessary.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Gazan terrorists fired volley after volley of rockets on Southern towns on Saturday, as red alert sirens wailed repeatedly, warning residents to flee for cover.
According to Israel Radio, over 60 rockets have fallen on the South on the fourth day of Operation Pillar of Defensive. The Iron Dome rocket defense system intercepted 15 of the rockets.
In the afternoon alone, four rockets landed in Ashdod, lightly injuring 4 people and causing damage to a house. Houses were also damaged in Eshkol and Be’er Tuviya. Six rockets hit Beersheba, and four others in the vicinity were shot down.
In total, Palestinians fired 700 rockets toward the Jewish state since the beginning of Operation Pillar of Defense on Wednesday, but only around 30 landed in built-up areas. Iron Dome intercepted 230 projectiles in total, maintaining a 90% intercept rate.Four IDF soldiers were lightly injured by shrapnel from a rocket in the Eshkol area.
IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz instructed the military on Saturday afternoon to increase the rate of strikes on terrorist cells, among them rocket launching squads.
The Israel Air Force struck 200 targets in the Gaza Strip overnight Friday, including 120 rocket launchers and 20 tunnels, bringing the total number of targets throughout Operation Pillar of Defense to 830.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
We explore realms of the obvious:
In a blockbuster report, John Solomon, the former Associated Press and Post reporter, has ferreted out the president’s daily brief that informed him within 72 hours of the Sept. 11 attack that the Benghazi attack was a jihadist operation.
Citing officials directly familiar with the information, Solomon writes in the Washington Guardian that Obama and other administration officials were told that “that the attack was likely carried out by local militia and other armed extremists sympathetic to al-Qaida in the region.”
. . .
How could the president and his senior staff then have allowed (or rather, sent) Rice to go out to tell an entirely different tale to the American people on Sept. 16 on five TV shows?
One explanation might be that the President figures we “can’t handle the truth”. And by “can’t handle” I mean “do not deserve” or “lack the power to hold him to anything like doing the job of President”.
Chris Cassone has recorded the Benghazi anthem. Spread it virally. May the deaths of Stevens, Smith, Woods and Doherty, arguably the most blatant combat snuffing since Uriah the Hittite, be a millstone about Obama’s neck.
We all knew he knew,how could the president not have been made aware of the facts? But, this is another chunk of evidence proving to all of us that he did know. But, what of it? The media helped hide this until after the election, so, we are stuck!
From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
Disturbing RAND Report Finds That The American Public Hardly Notices The Encroachment of The Muslim Brotherhood into The U.S.
(Washington Institute analyst Eric Trager has written an article analyzing a RAND report that discusses how the U.S. government can further engage with the Muslim Brotherhood while insulating themselves from “domestic criticism.” The article begins:
November 12, 2012, Vol. 18, No. 09 There is one curious beneficiary of the September 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi that cost four American lives: Egypt’s new Muslim Brotherhood government. The attack in Libya and subsequent controversy has almost entirely obscured the siege that same day of the American embassy in Cairo, and President Mohamed Morsi’s irresponsible handling of a very dangerous situation. It was only when President Obama phoned Morsi two days after the protests started and read him the riot act that Morsi denounced the attack and vowed to secure the embassy. The Brotherhood’s first response to the attack—to praise it and schedule its own protests—was not surprising. The Obama administration’s pursuit of friendly engagement with the party has led it to believe that it can get away with just about anything. The Brotherhood’s emergence as Egypt’s new ruling party has substantially altered the U.S. policy debate over dealing with Islamists. Given Egypt’s cultural and strategic centrality within the Arab world, the question is no longer whether we should deal with Islamists, but how. The White House’s answers leave much to be desired. Rather than put conditions on America’s generous package of economic and military aid, the administration has often appeared to believe that through deeper engagement, the United States can build richer, friendlier relations with the organization and convince it to soften its hostile, intolerant views. For instance, in early September, the White House arranged for a U.S. business delegation to visit Egypt and meet with top Brotherhood businessmen. Unfortunately, just as the delegation made a point at a Cairo press conference to praise Egypt’s stable business climate, across town an angry mob was laying siege to the U.S. embassy, while the Brotherhood hardly played the role of stabilizer. Nonetheless, the effort to engage the Brotherhood on its own terms instead of ours continues. A new RAND report, ‘The Muslim Brotherhood, Its Youth, and Implications for U.S. Engagement,’ calls on Washington to engage Muslim Brotherhood youth figures, who may be the organization’s—and Egypt’s—future leaders.
‘Engagement offers both sides an opportunity to dispel misunderstandings,’ the report states. Engaging ‘up-and-coming youth within the organization who are not used to engaging the West’ will make long-term U.S.-Brotherhood relations more sustainable.
The report recommends a variety of ways in which U.S. policymakers can use engagement to encourage the Brotherhood to act more cooperatively, such as coordinating American speakers for Brotherhood student events; inviting Brotherhood youth leaders to speak at American universities; and offering Brotherhood youth opportunities to study in the United States.
Read the rest here.
The RAND report says at one point
U.S.-MB engagement has progressed largely without incident and with surprisingly little domestic pushback within the United States. Positive statements about MB positions from Republican leaders such as Senator McCain and regular congressional meetings with MB members insulate the administration from domestic criticism of engagement policies.
1) regularize and routinize engagement, including among members of Congress and FJP parliamentarians, to reduce politicization of engagement efforts.
The more regular and normalized that contact becomes, the less engagement is vulnerable to becoming a target of political attacks in the United States and the more it will be viewed as the normal course of diplomacy. As Nathan Brown argues, now that the MB operates a legal political party and has become a dominant player in Egyptian politics, “having normal diplomatic contact with the [MB] makes sense. But trumpeting the policy . . . is a mistake—it generates exaggerated expectations and fears all around.”50 Engagement can also be insulated from domestic political attacks by having more members of Congress, rather than just administration officials, directly meet MB members. The Obama administration has already reached out to the Hill to educate members on the MB, address concerns, and plan more parliamentary exchanges.51 Exchanges between American congressional and Egyptian parliamentary staff could also prove fruitful. In addition, Congress can host FJP parliamentarians and staff to observe American political processes, such as nominating conventions.
In other words, this a deliberate plan to sell the Muslim Brotherhood to the U.S. public through a campaign of psychological manipulation.
GMBDR notes that this is one of the most egregiously manipulative documents on the Muslim Brotherhood that we have seen to date.
The entire RAND report can be found here.
From: The Global Brotherhood Daily Report – http://globalmbreport.org/?p=7352
Found at Blazing Cat Fur: http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.com/
Obama Met With Panetta and Biden at WH As Benghazi Terror Attack Unfolded, refused help as people were murdered
Every day brings a new blockbuster. Obama has lost the military, the State Department and the Intelligence community. It’s one leak after another. He has made enemies of all of them. He betrayed them all.
We will find out every detail of Obama’s abandonment of the American people and trasonous cover-up of this act of war.
“Obama Met With Panetta and Biden at WH As Benghazi Terror Attack Unfolded”CNS, October 30, 2012(CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama met with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Vice President Joe Biden at the White House on Sept. 11, 2012 at 5:00 PM—just 55 minutes after the State Department notified the White House and the Pentagon that the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi was under attack. The meeting between Obama, Panetta and Biden had been scheduled before the attack took place, and the Department of Defense is not commenting now on whether the three men were aware when they met that day of the ongoing attack or whether Obama used that meeting to discuss with his defense secretary what should be done to defend the U.S. personnel who at that very moment were fighting for their lives in Benghazi.“Secretary Panetta met with President Obama, as the White House-provided scheduled indicates,” Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale, a Defense Department spokesman, told CNSNews.com on Tuesday. “However, neither the content nor the subject of discussions between the President and his advisors are appropriate for disclosure.”
The fact that the president had been scheduled to meet with Vice President Biden and Defense Secretary Panetta at 5:00 p.m. on Sept. 11 had been publicized in the Washington Daybook–a planning service to which news organizations subscribe–and included on the official White House schedule posted online by the White House itself.
The State Department email notifying the White House and Pentagon of the Sept. 11 Benghazi attack was obtained by CBS News and reported by Sharyl Attkisson on Oct. 23, almost six weeks after the attack.
The terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi began at about 9:40 p.m. Benghazi time—or about 3:40 p.m. Washington, D.C. time. “The attack began at approximately 9:40 p.m. local time,” Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Charlene Lamb told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in written testimony submitted Oct. 10.
About 25 minutes after the attack started—at 4:05 p.m. Washington, D.C. time—the State Department sent an email that went to multiple recipients, including two at the White House and one at the Pentagon.
The subject line on this email said: “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack.” The text of the email said: “The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack. Embassy Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and our COM personnel are in the compound safe haven.” It went on to say: “The Operations Center will provide updates as available.”
In her testimony to the Oversight Committee, Charlene Lamb indicated that soon after the attack started, she was able to monitor it from Washington, D.C., in “almost real time.”
“When the attack began, a Diplomatic Security agent working in the Tactical Operations Center immediately activated the Imminent Danger Notification System and made an emergency announcement over the PA,” Lamb testified. “Based on our security protocols, he also alerted the annex U.S. quick reaction security team stationed nearby, the Libyan 17th February Brigade, Embassy Tripoli, and the Diplomatic Security Command Center in Washington. From that point on, I could follow what was happening in almost real-time.”
According to Lamb, three U.S. agents used an armored car to approach the safe haven at the U.S. consulate to rescue a U.S. security agent on the roof of the facility and also to try to retrieve Amb. Chris Stevens and Sean Smith, an Air Force veteran and State Department communications specialist.
“Despite thick smoke, the agents entered the building multiple times trying to locate the Ambassador and Mr. Smith,” Lamb testified. “After numerous attempts, they found Sean Smith and, with the assistance of members of the U.S. quick reaction team, removed him from the building. Unfortunately, he was already deceased. They still could not find the Ambassador.”
It was not until 11:00 p.m. Benghazi time—or just as Obama’s 5:00 p.m. meeting with Panetta and Biden was starting in Washington, D.C.—that the U.S. agents in Benghazi decided to abandon the main consulate facility there.
“At 11 p.m. members of the Libyan 17th February Brigade advised they could no longer hold the area around the main building and insisted on evacuating the site,” Lamb testified. “The agents made a final search for the Ambassador before leaving in an armed vehicle.”
But the battle was far from over.
“Upon arriving at the annex around midnight, they took up defensive positions, including on the roof,” Lamb testified. “Shortly after their arrival, the annex itself began taking intermittent fire for a period of time.”
The battle continued, with the attackers now using mortars, and it was only in the “early morning” that two more Americans were killed and two more were wounded.
“In the early morning, an additional security team arrived from Tripoli and proceeded to the annex,” Lamb testified. “Shortly after they arrived, the annex started taking mortar fire, with as many as three direct hits on the compound. It was during this mortar attack that Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed and a Diplomatic Security agent and an annex quick reaction security team member were critically wounded.”
Doherty and Woods were both former Navy Seals who served in both the Iraq and Afghan wars. They were working as U.S. security personnel in Libya.
When exactly did Obama learn that the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi was under attack and whom did he order to do something about it? The White House is not saying.
“I can tell you, as I’ve said over the last couple of months since this happened, the minute I found out what was happening, I gave three very clear directives,” Obama told KUSA TV in Denver on Friday. “Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to.”
Fred Lucas of CNSNews.com asked the White House on both Monday and Tuesday to reveal exactly when Obama learned the U.S. mission in Benghazi was under attack and who exactly Obama directed to “make sure that we are securing our personnel” there. The White House did not respond.
At an Oct. 25 Pentagon press briefing, a reporter noted that “there was, in fact, a drone over the CIA annex [in Benghazi] and there were intelligence officials fighting inside the annex.” He then asked Panetta: “Why there wasn’t a clear intelligence picture that would have given you what you needed to make some moves, for instance, flying, you know, F-16s over the area to disperse fighters or dropping more special forces in?”
Read the rest.
Did Barack Hussein Obama fire General Ham of Africom for trying to disobey his order NOT to rescue Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi?
Pat Dollard is reporting a still unconfirmed rumor that bears further investigation. The story is about General Ham mentioned by Leon Panetta in the quote below.
“(The) basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,” Panetta told Pentagon reporters. “And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”
Pat Dollard The information I heard today was that General Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had the unit ready.
General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command. The story continues that now General Rodiguez would take General Ham’s place as the head of Africon.
“President Barack Obama will nominate Army Gen. David Rodriguez to succeed Gen. Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command.”
Lt. Col Tony Shaffer: “My sources tell me Obama was in the room watching the Benghazi attack in real time.”
RightScoop Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer said his sources tell him that Obama was in the room watching the Benghazi attack go down and both he and Col. David Hunt agree it would have taken an order by the president to intervene. Further, Col. Hunt said that we were only 20 min away by jet and a couple of hours away by AC-130 gunships and special forces, and the decision not to intervene had to be political.
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
Now President Obama says he gave a clear directive to protect secure personnel, but where is the paper trail?
“I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, we’re going to investigate exactly what happened to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice.”
“If that actually happened the way President Obama said it happened, there’s a paper trail and I think people reasonably enough can say, “Can we see the order?” because hundreds of others supposedly saw this order.
So, basically, he is trying to throw everyone under the bus here. One problem for me is this, if such an order was given, why did President not follow-up? Certainly we should expect that our Commander-in-Chief would be monitoring the events, getting constant updates. Obama’s latest story makes it sound like he just threw out a directive, to use his word, and threw up his hands. One more glaring problem here is that why wasn’t the president saying this weeks ago? Why does his version of events keep evolving? Sadly, I think we know why.
Violence, the thinking in diplomatic circles went, was inherently alarming and destabilizing. When Islamists don’t take over, they move to the West, preach radical theology, gather up followers and begin blowing things up. But let them take over their own home countries and they’ll no longer have any reason to draw up maps of London and New York, not when they’re beheading adulterers and burning churches back home.
The Arab Spring was to the Middle East what the betrayal of Czechoslovakia to the Nazis and the betrayal of the rest of Eastern Europe to the Communists was to 20th Century European history. It was the moment when all the diplomatic folly that had come before it came together in one great historical instant of national and international betrayal.
The diplomatic wunderkinds had never taken Islamist theology seriously, just as their predecessors had not considered the possibility that the Bolsheviks might be serious about their world revolution. And they had also failed to recognize that Islamic terrorism was not only a means to power, but also an end in and of itself, a way of harnessing the endless violence and instability in desert societies and turning them into power and profit.
What every Middle Eastern leader has always understood is that the violence, call it raids, terrorism, guerrilla warfare, gang activity, sectarian militias, military coups, desert banditry, was never going away. It was the tiger and the clever leader rides the tiger, rather than ending up inside it, harnessing and directing the violence, to remain in power.
Islam is a religion built around that violence, sanctifying it as a religious principle, and thus taking it out of the realm of Fitna and into the realm of Jihad. The difference between the two is a matter of theology and that theology is a matter of perspective. What is banditry and what is a holy war is a matter of where you’re standing and which way the bullets are flying.
The Islamists might be able to direct the violence, but they could no more shut it down than any of their secular predecessors could. They could kill their enemies, but only by unleashing the tiger on them and when the killing was done, they would still be left with a hungry tiger looking around for his next meal. So the Islamists, like the Saudis, were bound to fuse religion with realpolitik by making sure that the tigers were pointed our way.
Even if their violence were only a means to an end, the end would not come when every Middle Eastern country was run by Islamist governments. For one thing there would never be a means of agreeing on what a truly Islamist government was. The reactionary impetus of Wahhabism leads to an endless series of reforms meant to recreate a lost 7th Century theological paradise by purging those damnable 8th Century theological innovators.
To many Salafists, the Muslim Brotherhood is just Mubarak with a beard. To other Salafists, those Salafists are just the Muslim Brotherhood with an untrimmed beard. After overthrowing Mubarak to end the perception that the United States supports UnIslamic dictators, maintaining ties with the Muslim Brotherhood would invite attacks from those Salafists in the hopes of ending US support for the Brotherhood, resetting that foreign policy accomplishment to zero. And the Brotherhood would wink and nod at those attacks to maintain its Islamist street cred and keep the violence going in the other direction.
As the attacks of September 11, 2012 showed us, the effect of putting the Islamists in charge of the Arab Spring countries was not to relieve tensions or improve America’s image, but to make it easier for Jihadists to launch attacks on America. And the argument advanced by Obma and so many others, that it was our support for dictators that inspired terrorists, had come to nothing. As Carter had done in Iran, Obama had stood behind the Islamists and against the “dictators”, only to have the newly Islamist dictators kick him in the face, first through mobs carrying out attacks against American diplomatic facilities under the guise of plausible deniability, and then through bolder confrontations.
But finally, the seizure of one Muslim country or two of them or a dozen of them is not the end of the Islamists. Islamists don’t recognize borders or national identities, no more than the Communists did. Their objective is not a flag of their own, but the territorial expansion of their ideology. This expansion is not measured in miles, but in populations. It persists regardless of lines on a map or country names. It measures its power in people, because people are the region’s only resource.
Territory alone is useless. The Middle East doesn’t produce much agriculturally and what it does produce is done with primitive, often near-feudal labor. About the only territorial worth comes from oil and the worth of the oil comes from the money that foreigners are willing to pay for it. Having the foreigners come to their country to pump the oil for them so that they can then sell the oil back to the foreigners has built the wealth of a dozen emirs, kings and dictators. And that wealth has been used to buy the services of Islamist militias in an arrangement that we know as terrorism, but that the locals know as the raid.
Islam has turned the raid into a crusade, but at its core it is still a tribal expansion, an outing to seize land, loot and women from neighboring tribes. And the neighboring tribes with the most appealing land, loot and women are the ones living across the Mediterranean in Europe. Getting there requires a boat or a plane ticket, a claim of refugee status and then the No-Go-Zones, the gangs and the rapes begin. And amid that violence, the preachers come and attract the more religiously-minded to the formal Jihad, as opposed to the informal violent persecution of non-Muslim tribes through robbery, rape and murder that was routine in their old region and has now been carried over into the West..
The Islamists would be under a theological obligation to expand their control over the infidels even if there were no Muslims in the West, but the presence of Muslims in the West makes the takeover of Western countries necessary for the same reason that the takeover of Muslim countries by Islamists was necessary.
When Western leaders try to curry favor with Muslim leaders by talking about how many Muslims live in their countries, they are providing the same cause for war that the Czechs did to the Germans. Muslim immigration to the West creates a mandate to impose Islamic law on the West. Western leaders react to that by offering to accept some elements of Sharia into their legal system. This moves the process into the second stage, the one that the Arab Spring countries were under, practicing an imperfect version of Islamic law that the Islamists were then compelled to “perfect.”
Everything that the West has done to appease Muslims has worked as well as a man jumping into a tiger cage and pouring meat sauce all over his body. Each act of appeasement only makes Muslim violence necessary and inevitable. Every increase in the Islamic footprint in the West attracts Islamists intent on expanding and purifying that footprint, as they have done in their own countries. The more the West takes in Islamic populations and laws, the more Islamists are compelled to bring diaspora Muslim populations and laws into full compliance with their theology.
Obama’s foreign policy aimed at allowing the Islamists to win. He ignored the Iranian protesters against an Islamist state, while rushing to support the Islamist protesters in Egypt and Tunisia. The Islamists won and September 11, 2012 was a consequence of those victories. And it won’t be the last consequence.
As Chamberlain learned of Hitler and as the Democrats learned of the Commies, there is no finite amount of concessions, no set range of territories that can be traded in exchange for peace. The Nazis and Communists wanted the world because their goals were not confined to mere territories, but to the enslavement of billions to create an ideal world for the benefit of their chosen elites. Islam is interested in the same thing.
Islamists don’t want Egypt, Syria or Palestine. And they certainly won’t settle for them. No more than Hitler settled for Czechoslovakia or Stalin settled for Poland. They will accept their conquests in bites, but they will never stop biting, chewing and swallowing until they run up against a force that will not allow them to advance and expand further.
Obama tried to divide violent Islamism from political Islamism, giving the Islamists what they wanted without violence, to eliminate the need for a War on Terror. But all he accomplished was to give Islamist violence a bigger base and more resources to work with. Islam is inherently violent. A non-violent Islamic victory doesn’t end the violence; it only expands its capacity for violence.
Barack Hussein Obama: “Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military’s changed.” (Well, maybe not so much)
Horsetalk Eleven years to the day after US Army Special Operations horse soldiers joined the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan to roust the Taliban from its strongholds, 200 war heroes have gathered at the World Trade Center memorial to rededicate a statue honouring the mounted troops.
Those war heroes include those who first parachuted into the Afghan mountains under the cover of snow and darkness to hit back against the Taliban.
They gathered on Friday at the World Trade Centre Memorial to rededicate the monumental bronze statue of the Horse Soldier. The statue is fittingly placed watching over the WTC Memorial. “Today, just as we gather to rededicate this statue, we pledge to rededicate ourselves to honor the bravest that our nation has to offer,” said Vince McGowan, president of the United War Veterans Council.
“As conflicts around the world wind down, this work of art will remind all visitors to the WTC Memorial of those who altered the course of history after September 11, 2001 – and, indeed, those who have served bravely in all wars.”
The 16-foot tall bronze statue is entitled De Oppresso Liber, or “to liberate the oppressed”, the motto of the United States Army Special Forces. It was cast in bronze by renowned sculptor Douwe Blumberg.
Due to long-planned construction and improvements at World Financial Center, the statue is being rededicated and moved to a temporary location. Constellations Group chief executie Bill White, who was master of ceremonies, said: “The Horse Soldier statue represents the best of our armed forces: bravery, strength, cunning and shared sacrifice.
“As we pause to reflect and rededicate, we welcome all visitors who come to the memorial to join us in paying tribute to these remarkable soldiers and all of those who fight for our nation.”
Excuse me, when did Islam become a race? Muslims blame the media, the EDL, the National Front party, and all the ‘Islamophobic’ bloggers for making Muslims the most reviled people on earth. Yet never once, do they ask themselves, what are we doing that makes people so hostile toward us?
Share this From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Emails Show White House Briefed on Benghazi Terrorism in Real Time — Ansar al-Sharia Claimed Responsibility
A series of email alerts sent as Obama administration officials monitored the attack on the U.S consulate in Benghazi last month are the latest to shine light on the chaotic events that culminated in the death of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.
The names of the individual recipients of the emails, first reported by CBS News but independently obtained by ABC News Tuesday evening, are redacted. A source who requested anonymity said it appears they are sent by the State Department Operations Center to distribution lists and email accounts for the top national security officials at the State Department, Pentagon, the FBI, the White House Situation Room and the office of the Director of National Intelligence.
And that’s a compelling interview with Sarah Palin at the clip. I haven’t seen her this animated —- literally angry —- in quite some time. Here’s Greta’s report, “BREAKING NEWS: Emails show the Obama administration knew Ansar al Sharia was behind the attack in Benghazi.”
And at London’s Daily Mail, “White House knew al Qaeda-linked group claimed responsibility for deadly Libya attack just TWO HOURS later, emails reveal.”
And check out this devastating piece at Youngstown News out of Ohio, “Lies being told about attack in Benghazi“:
It was a little much when President Barack Obama said that he was ”offended” by the suggestion that his administration would try to deceive the public about what happened in Benghazi. What has this man not deceived the public about?
Remember his pledge to cut the deficit in half in his first term in office? This was followed by the first trillion dollar deficit ever, under any President of the United States — followed by trillion dollar deficits in every year of the Obama administration.
Remember his pledge to have a ”transparent” government that would post its legislative proposals on the Internet several days before Congress was to vote on them….
As for what happened in Libya, the Obama administration says that there is an ”investigation” under way. An ”on-going investigation” sounds so much better than ”stonewalling” to get past election day. But you can bet the rent money that this ”investigation” will not be completed before election day. And whatever the investigation says after the election will be irrelevant.
The events unfolding in Benghazi on the tragic night of Sept. 11 were being relayed to the State Department as the attacks were going on, ”in real time,” as they say. So the idea that the Obama administration now has to carry out a time-consuming ”investigation” to find out what those events were, when the information was immediately available at the time, is a little much.
The full story of what happened in Libya, down to the last detail, may never be known. But, as someone once said, you don’t need to eat a whole egg to know that it is rotten. And you don’t need to know every detail of the events before, during and after the attacks to know that the story put out by the Obama administration was a fraud.
The administration’s initial story that what happened in Benghazi began as a protest against an anti-Islamic video in America was a very convenient theory. The most obvious alternative explanation would have been devastating to Barack Obama’s much heralded attempts to mollify and pacify Islamic nations in the Middle East.
To have helped overthrow pro-Western governments in Egypt and Libya, only to bring anti-Western Islamic extremists to power would have been revealed as a foreign policy disaster of the first magnitude. To have been celebrating President Obama’s supposedly heroic role in the killing of Osama bin Laden, with the implication that al-Qaida was crippled, would have been revealed as a farce.
Osama bin Laden was by no means the first man to plan a surprise attack on America and later be killed. Japan’s Admiral Yamamoto planned the attack on Pearl Harbor that brought the United States into World War II, and he was later tracked down and shot down in a plane that was carrying him.
Neither the Los Angeles Times nor the New York Times had this breaking at their websites as of 10:15pm Pacific time, as this post was being scheduled for overnight, although Huffington Post and Reuters had the news. I’ll have more on this later.
It becomes clearer by the day. The administration’s been covering things up all along, and lying remorselessly. Conservatives are hammering the White House. While progressives are enabling the cover up with denials and obfuscation. We’ll see how things play out for the remainder of the day. It’s not going to be pretty, that’s for sure.
From American Power Blog: http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/
Former CIA Officials Say No Way WH Didn’t Know Benghazi Was A Terrorist Attack, Even During The Attack (Video)
Judge Jeanine had three former CIA officers on her show tonight that described something called a “Critic”, short for critical incident, which is a report fired off in a crisis by a Chief of Station that goes to everyone in the intelligence community in real time. They describe it like a flare being fired off in an emergency, that it tells everyone that something critical is going on and they have to take action immediately:
I was a Chief of Station three different times so I’ve done this before. That report, a Flash or a Critic going back to Washington D.C. goes to CIA headquarters but it also goes to the situation room in the White House. It goes to the Bureau of Intelligence and Research in the State Department. It goes to the military committee – it goes to all of them… When you’re a Chief of Station and you’re in a crisis, you fire out to the entire community and they all go it immediately.
Watch the eye-opening report below:
From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
Hillary Claims Responsibility – So The President Didn’t Know What Was Going On? That’s Total Bullshit and They All Know It.
“If the President was truly not aware of this rising threat level in Benghazi, then we have lost confidence in his national security team…”
“We have just learned that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has claimed full responsibility for any failure to secure our people and our Consulate in Benghazi prior to the attack of September 11, 2012. This is a laudable gesture, especially when the White House is trying to avoid any responsibility whatsoever.
“However, we must remember that the events of September 11 were preceded by an escalating pattern of attacks this year in Benghazi, including a bomb that was thrown into our Consulate in April, another explosive device that was detonated outside of our Consulate in June, and an assassination attempt on the British Ambassador. If the President was truly not aware of this rising threat level in Benghazi, then we have lost confidence in his national security team, whose responsibility it is to keep the President informed. But if the President was aware of these earlier attacks in Benghazi prior to the events of September 11, 2012, then he bears full responsibility for any security failures that occurred. The security of Americans serving our nation everywhere in the world is ultimately the job of the Commander-in-Chief. The buck stops there.
“Furthermore, there is the separate issue of the insistence by members of the Administration, including the President himself, that the attack in Benghazi was the result of a spontaneous demonstration triggered by a hateful video, long after it had become clear that the real cause was a terrorist attack. The President also bears responsibility for this portrayal of the attack, and we continue to believe that the American people deserve to know why the Administration acted as it did.”