The Murders in Libya, The Presidential Debate, and The Pattern of Obama Foreign Policy
In the debate, Obama charged:
While we were still dealing with our diplomats being threatened, Governor Romney put out a press release trying to make political points. And that’s not how a commander in chief operates. You don’t turn national security into a political issue, certainly not right when it’s happening.
Yet all three of the above lies were precisely a matter of turning “national security into a political issue,” and that is what Obama has done throughout his term.
To acknowledge the cause of the attack would have been to acknowledge the real threat in the Middle East and the embarrassing fact that American weapons had been given to terrorist, anti-American groups. Incidentally, far from learning anything in Libya, Obama is now doing precisely the same thing in Syria.
To acknowledge the nature of the attack would be to show the depth of the security failure — on September 11 of all days — in not recognizing the danger in Benghazi. This includes the fact that the guards were untrained; that they had — according to one of them — been aware of the danger and not told any Americans; that they had fled; that Libyan regime sources had apparently tipped off the attackers to where Americans were hiding; and that there had been no U.S.-provided security. Was that last shortcoming due to an attempt not to “offend” the Libyans by showing they weren’t trusted? If so, that arises directly from the themes Obama has set in his foreign policy.
In addition, attributing the event to a video produced in the United States — a clear and obvious lie — put a large part of the blame on America itself. No, huge forces aren’t seeking to create radical Islamist regimes in every country in the Middle East; there are just folks offended by a slur on their religion.
To admit that al-Qaeda is still very much in business would show that Obama’s claim the group had been defeated was false and demonstrate the limited value of killing Osama bin Laden. Al-Qaeda is, of course, still strong in Yemen and Somalia as well as having active groups in the Gaza Strip, Iraq, Syria, and other places.
Obama continues in the debate:
But when it comes to our national security, I mean what I say. I said I’d end the war in Libya — in Iraq, and I did. I said that we’d go after al-Qaida and bin Laden. We have. I said we’d transition out of Afghanistan and start making sure that Afghans are responsible for their own security. That’s what I’m doing.
What Obama should have said is that he would end U.S. combat presence in these countries. Yet the wars continue. The assassination of the U.S. ambassador to Libya was an event in that war.
And contrary to Clinton’s statement, Obama affirmed: “…I am ultimately responsible for what’s taking place [in Libya]….”
It’s all over the net-news that there are thousands of “Stingers” unaccounted for, Barry.
How long before airliners are being knocked out of the air by missiles made by Northrop and Lockheed? Is everybody at State and CIA out to lunch? Do we have no Congressional oversight committees?
I’d call for media scrutiny but those bastards are worse than useless. When they’re not hiding the truth, they’re perverting it.
Yes it is, which begs the question: Did Obama authorize something with a little more range,
Something that the terrorists could not buy at an arms bazaar in Afghanistan ?
Not to mention the “delivery” of a stealth drone to Iranians. Intact.
Could a stealth drone deliver a nuclear bomb?
Surely he was in Bengazi for urgent security business, likely negotiating terms to buy back the most destructive weapons systems currently awash in Libya. Many have surely made their way to the Sinai for Hizbullah etc.
Thanks, Barack HUSSEIN Obama!
So, the next question is this – why is it, that everything the Islamist-in-Chief touches in the Mid East renders Islamists more empowered, and much better armed? In other words, isn’t it safe to assume that he backs said results, despite the administration’s protestations to the contrary?
Then, isn’t it fair to compare the POTUS to a Pyromaniac-in-Chief,who turns around pretending to be the fire marshal, just as the explosion reaches its apex?
http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/09/26/unraveling-the-video-the-so-called-triggerfuse-of-libyan-egyptian-islamic-rage-sweeping-the-globe-northeast-intelligence-network-walid-shoebat-too-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/
Therefore, the citizens have a double indictment against the POTUS; one for the first crime, empowering the Islamists either covertly or overtly, the second, for lying to them via a dastardly cover up.
Either way, he should be in jail – one way or another.
I agree with what you’re saying. However, in addition to not providing the additional security repeatedly requested by those connected to the Benghazi consulate, including those from the ambassador, the security that was already in place was removed a month before the attacks. The question is why? The ambassador was a sitting duck. In addition, there was internet chatter on twitter 2 days prior to the attack where the attackers announced their intentions. Why was the ambassador at the consulate on 9/11? This gives weight to the rumor that he was unknowingly being set up to be kidnapped by friends of The Muslim Brotherhood in agreement with Barry so that Barry could come off as the great negotiator and Mid East expert prior to the election. Unfortunately, it all went awry and therefore the coverup with the other 3 patriots as collateral damage. The speculated upon wag the dog bombing of Libya will probably take place this weekend, once Barry’s handlers put their fingers in the air to test the winds prior to Monday’s foreign policy debate, where Benghazi and Fast & Furious will surely be discussed. Not only could they bomb an aspirin factory and hit a camel in the butt, but they could possibly destroy some of the weapons Barry unwittingly (or maybe not) gave Al Qaeda prior to the liberation of that country.
Between Mr. Rubin’s analysis and, your comment – I beleive that this is closer to the truth.
Also, consider the following: Since the current admin once again wants to treat ‘terrorism’ as a law enforcement issue,why did it take the FBI 3 weeks to go there after the fact?
Was that the ‘waiting’ period to assure, that the scene was cleaned up and, that any documents left behind by the CIA etc were ‘gone’? Since CNN was able to walk in and, get Stevens journal,why waiting for 3 weeks to investigate?
While I am convinced, that there is a ‘wag the dog or false flag’ being considered, since obama also announced his intent to the world, I ask why would he advertise his intent? Wouldn’t be better to have a ‘surprise’ waiting for the jihadists who killed our people?
Something is really stinking up the place and, no matter how many crowleys, hillaries or others attempt to distract and, mislead – hopefully, the truth will out; our military not being used a peersoanl mercenariesor set up to be killed – like the recent CIA agents being assassinated by insiders in Afghanistan!!
How is it that CNN could get inside the compound at Benghazi within a couple days, while it took the FBI close to a week? As more facts about the attack becomes known, the worse its becoming for this administration. What were they all covering up, and for what reasons did they allow the death of these 4 Americans?
When has any administration decided to do nothing to protect American lives in a violent foreign country, so as to have the scene appear as normal??
Libya is an illegally occupied country that is far from liberated. Anyone can see that the country was even listed on Wikpedia as a direct democracy. You have been brain washed!
Actually, it’s a heck of a lot worse than you might imagine. Instead of trying to get the weapons back into our own hand, the Obama administration has been funneling both weapons and personnel to al Qaeda in Syria.
US consulate in Benghazi was a hub for recruiting jihadis to fight for al Qaeda in Syria
The weapons system in question is obviously one or another variety of surface to air missile. What you are suggesting is that in Lybia hand in Syria we have gunwalking scandals writ large. American undercover agents selling automatic rifles to Mexican drug dealers is one thing. The CIA putting SAMs in the hands of Muslim militiamen is another.
Control of billions of barrels of light, sweet crude–the best in the world–is our clear goal in Libya. What is our goal in Syria and who are the Muslim rebels we are arming?
This sleazy Chicago racialist pol needs to be gone along with all his creepy handlers. November can’t come too soon.
I think you pretty much answered your own query. Muslims hate Jews and Barry has been showing his Jew hatred in spades (especially with his ‘dissing’ Benjamin Netanyahu).
I’m not shocked or surprised. His Jew hate was on clear display in his books and by the vile hatred spewed by Rev. Wright himself towards America and Israel.
One question. Is it our goal to secure the sweet crude for our own use or to put it at the disposal of The Muslim Brotherhood (in addition to all the gold Gahddafi was hoarding) as Barry aids TMB in its quest to take over the Middle East country by country to surround Israel and force her into the sea? Barry also gave Iran 3+ years to build a bomb and by overthrowing Mubarek, help TMB gain control of the Straits to block any aid to Israel.
Barry denies he was ever a Muslim, but his actions raise questions. He mentioned his Muslim faith to George Steffie 4 years ago and Rev. Wright admitted to Hannity in an interview several months ago that he wasn’t sure Barry ever converted from Islam.
I have always suspected that the Lybian fiasco was a faux hostage set up that went terribly wrong(the total lack of security for the ambassador going in is the tip-off). Pure and cynical Kabuki theater to allow Obama to ride to the rescue of our ambassabor (that he was gay is simply a double political bonus!). Where is the investigation into this?? Impeachment on stilts!
The fact that he was gay was seen by the islamists as a provocation. Who was the genius who thought that was a smart move?
Gay diplomats to Arabs are a venerable tradition we picked up from the British.
Besides certain peculiarities about homo sex in islamic culture, a good practical reason to send in a homo is that he would have no wife present as potential rape meat tempting local muslims.
Lets examine the USURPER’s and his REGIMES constant LIES and COVER UP over Benghazi shall we.
On the recent debate the USURPER said HE called it TERRORISM the very next day. Of course he did not he mentioned Terrorism but NEVER linked it to the Benghazi attack at all. But just for the sake of argument lets accept the USURPERS LIES and agree he did call it Terrorism the next day. Well now we need HIM to explain how HE, Shrillary, the UN Ambassador and all the other REGIME sycophants spent the next THREE WEEKS blaming it all on the VIDEO. We are expected to believe the USURPER knew it was ISLAMIC (strange hey how they NEVER say Islamic) TERRORISM the very next day but then allowed his corrupt Regime and HIMSELF to go out and LIE about the VIDEO for WEEKS thereafter.
How do we even know the video wasn’t part of the intended cover story, that they found difficult to part from. There was no movie, only a trailer. And only recently was it translated (and doctored). Then it coincidentally shows up in the ME. Then a paid informant and author of the ‘movie’ is whisked away for questioning.
Mighty coincidental.
Dec 27, 2011 In this video Hilary Clinton admits that the US government created and funded Al-Qaeda in order to fight the soviet union, and she even considers that as a good thing. But she claims that the Americans are fighting Al-Qaeda nowadays.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqn0bm4E9yw&feature=related
Oh oh, don’t tell me, the Obama Administration lost some more assault weapons again? You know, like the weapons that were lost track of and went to Mexico to better arm the drug cartels so they could better kill each other? Maybe the American ambassador to Mexico should have offered to buy the weapons back from the cartels during a secret jungle meeting in Chiapas?
Love the veiled reference to Hunt For Red October.
Whatever happened to our genius General Petraeus – is CIA sleeping or just dumb?
Petraeus supported the spontaneous-demonstration-gone-horribly-awry version at the outset. He has since retreated back to the shadows and none of our ever-reliable journalists pursued the matter. Intellectually appealing generals are uncommon and our over-educated and over-credentialled MSM can’t get enough of the Petraeus. The General may well be the guy who originally concocted the spontaneous-demonstration-gone-horribly-awry version
Plus, the general’s wife was given a lovely cushy government job when he agreed to be CIA chief.
By the time Petraeus mouthed the “it was because of the video” talking point, the internet was already buzzing with the fact that there was no protest. Also, I believe the Libyan president had said that the video was not the spark that set Benghazi off. I was actually quite surprised that Petraeus supported the administration’s already shaky story line. But, as you point out, he has been mystifyingly silent on the subject ever since.
Rubin: “In other words, Obama said let’s increase security — after the attack was made — and then investigate and find those responsible for the attack.”
I am wondering about the Obama claim of immediately increasing security for American embassies after the Benghazi attack. News media (in Canada) were reporting that the Yemen embassy on Sept. 13 was “over run” and that there was no beefed up security (which caused some reporters to ask questions about where the missing in action prez was).
imo, the president is a pathological liar. He brazenly tells whoppers — one after the other — utter and complete lies that no 10 year old would fall for.
Obama and crew need to make the Bengazi affair a “criminal act,” not an act of war.
That way Holder will do the investigating. And should we catch some of the perps, we’ll hold public trials in Manhatten in the year 2020.
Remember, CSIs just secure any evidence and bring the body bags, and are generally far from the danger.
RE – silence: The Agency might be embarassed about losing the entire Bengazi station (40+ personnel), plus an Ambassador and 3 others, to a well-coordinated strike by Islamofascists, along with any chance of securing those lost weapons.
If what you say is true, that this was a Stevens going in to negotiate return of weapons without security, and instead was set up and killed, then is an enormous scandal of the highest order that will end the election right now.
It is mindblowing, but it does explain a lot of the response from the administration so far.
How confident are you that this is correct?
We are now watching “hour by hour” revisions and daily “self-sacrificing” or suicide aka “jumping under the bus” by Administration officials and employees. The next three weeks (and even thereafter, threaten to be tumultuous beyond imagination).
THE BAD NEWS:
- We have a Manchurian President, puppet of foreign masters, dedicated to the overthrow of this land, elected by fraud and maintained in office by deceit and treachery at every level.
- We have an administration and a Congress that has reached new highs in the “culture of corruption”.
- We have Media Whores or Presstitutes, who sold their souls years ago for the praise, power, glory, and money offered by their unseen yet wicked masters.
- We have Barbarians at the Gates who have defiled our embassies throughout the Middle East; burned our flags; murdered our citizens on OUR GROUND (Embassies are, by international law, DEEMED PART OF THE VERY COUNTRY WHO OWNS THEM; renounced our freedoms of speech and religion; and ANNOUNCED “HOLY WAR” to subjugate us and our posterity. {They will fail!]
- We have an administration which ACTIVELY COLLUDES AND CONSPIRES WITH THE ENEMIES OF OUR NATION.
- We have a judiciary which has begun to implement SHARIA, OR ISLAMIC LAW in place of the laws of our country.
- We have an ENTITLEMENT GENERATION which both wants to watch America burn and suck every last drop of unearned benefits it can obtain without regard to NEED, ABILITY TO WORK, OR RELIANCE UPON FAMILY OR OTHER REASONABLY AVAILABLE AND APPROPRIATE SOURCES.
THE GOOD NEWS:
+ We have an electorate which, after being deceived, swindled, lied to, and manipulated by all of the above has said: “WE REJECT THE PRETEND PRESIDENT; WE RENOUNCE HIS POLICIES; WE WILL SELECT A NEW COURSE, WITH NEW LEADERSHIP, AND A HIGHER LEVEL OF INVOLVEMENT FOR WE, THE PEOPLE.
+ WE HAVE ROMNEY & RYAN ABOUT TO WIN THE ELECTION IN LESS THAN THREE WEEKS!
+ We are returning to the God of Our Fathers—the one on our money; our Declaration of Independence; the Bible kept safe in the cornerstone of the National Monument; referenced in the Lincoln and Washington Memorials; praised and petitioned in our sacred hymns of patriotism—that Great God who established us against all odds and preserved our freedoms through centuries of strife and the wars of tyrants and despots everywhere. (This is ABOVE “points of doctrine”, it exceeds “creeds”, it eclipses “denominations”—IT IS A FUNDAMENTAL RETURN TO SHARED FAITH IN A HIGHER POWER WHICH UNITES US, HUMBLES US, AND LEADS TO BLESSINGS FROM HEAVEN ON ALL PEOPLE IN ALL OUR LAND.
The good news will “set right” the bad news–but it will be a long, hard struggle. WE, THE PEOPLE, THE PATRIOTS, THE WORKERS, THE EARNERS, THE BLOOD AND SWEAT OF THIS NATION HAVE COMMITTED OURSELVES TO THAT STRUGGLE. We shall win it.
Join us–we are of every language, every creed, every color, and every race, BUT WE ALL LOVE FREEDOM AND HATE EVIL. We are the brothers and sisters of a renewed America and the world has NOT SEEN THE LIKES OF US IN OUR LIFETIME. Don’t just watch–participate.
Contribute to honorable candidates at EVERY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT; aid them as best we can in our individual ways; “talk up” our choices with family, friends, co-workers, neighbors, etc; PRAY AND WORSHIP; AND THEN VOTE
thank you for that, I am going to print this and look at it when I feel completely without hope.
Thank you. I have a shred of hope after reading your most thought provoking post.
wonderfully worded and crafted…………..you nailed it all! This has been the wake-up call we needed, and dare I say, deserved. Get a copy of the DVD, Isaiah 9:10…..you will love it!
And do not forget the 3%…..the % of the citizenry who chose to participate in the fight against the British for our freedom! One good guy is better than a thousand bad ones. And that is why the NSA has been buying up lot’s of ammo, they are all terrible shots!
There is no smoke without fire!
There was plenty of smoke at the Benghazi consulate – not just on the night of the killing.
I’ve been curious as to why Stevens suddenly decided to make a surprise visit (unannounced) to Benghazi. I’ve read two different (probably false) accounts. One was written by an Arab female friend who alleged that Stevens was going to announce a state-of-the-art computer center, called “America Space”. Yeah, sure. On 9/11 the Ambassador races to Benghazi on a sudden flight out of Europe to announce “a computer center.” And another report mentioned a hospital was to be built. Neither strikes me as at all convincing. But a buy-back of American weapons, all those lost man-pads? Now that sounds more likely.
Yeah, but why on 9/11. That is too weird.
The date may have been chosen by the rebels they were to negotiate with. That also fits with the last-minute arrangements. Presumably the US had wanted such a meeting — with the rebels playing coy until things would be done on their terms. This is truly a deep doo doo situation suggesting that the terrorists may have gained the uppper hand. The Bhengazhi fiasco was staged to drive that point home. No wonder Obama is grasping at straws. He has screwed up royally — Hillary, just as bad.
So the reason Obama did not order a rescue of the ambassador and the other 3 Americans under attack is because Al Qaeda has up to thousands of stingers and vowed to use them if we dared send helicopters or aircraft? Obama and his chain of command were almost certainly in constant communication with the people in the consulate and/or safe house during the attack.
“If he was, as accounts by sources in the U.S. intelligence community suggested, negotiating with a terrorist, anti-American group to obtain the return of U.S. weapons provided during the civil war, that would have been a much higher-priority matter. I have been asked by sources not to reveal the specific weapons system that was Washington’s highest priority to buy back, but the details make sense.”
The ambassador was probably lured to Benghazi by a militia group for buying back some of the many shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles that went missing after Gaddafi was killed. The ambassador went to Benghazi and was probably told that his safety would be guaranteed by the local militia. It sounds almost like a mafia hit. Once he got there, he was alone and isolated, and then was murdered.
These may be old Russian-made shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, but they are still more than capable of shooting down an unarmed civilian airliner. Think of the terror that could be accomplished if a few of these were smuggled into either the United States or western Europe (or both) and several airliners were blown out of the sky by al Qaeda terrorists. This is probably the only thing that could have gotten our ambassador to go to Benghazi on the anniversary of 9/11, even though both he AND the State Department knew how dangerous that city was. They probably thought the mission justified the risk to the ambassador, and they lost that bet.
Two things that jump out at me, though. First, the State Department hired a private security firm to provide some additional security for the consulate. The “guards” were basically unarmed and in no way could have stopped a major military assault on the consulate. When are we going to STOP farming-out the security for our consulates and embassies to private firms and give it back to the Marines, where it belongs? There are literally thousands of private State Department security “contractors” guarding our embassy in Iraq right now, probably in Afghanistan as well. Only American military personnel should be given the task of defending Americans overseas. They are better trained, better qualified than most security contractors, much better disciplined, and have a lot more resources backing them up (i.e., weapons and aircraft). Only our own military should be defending our embassies and consulates, period. If the host countries don’t agree to this, then that country obviously isn’t safe enough for our State Department staff.
Second, I’m outraged that even to this day, Obama STILL has not held a single press conference about what happened in Libya. He gave one crappy short little speech in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, and that’s it. No updates, no further information on who was responsible and what we’re doing about it. Nothing, zip, zero. He hasn’t even given an interview like the one he gave Univision. You KNOW things are bad when a foreign news company can ask tougher questions than the Washington press corps. Just pathetic. The Washington press corps should demand some answers on a daily basis until Obama decides to have a press conference. I know this will never happen three weeks before the election, so it will have to be up to Romney in the last debate to get some answers to what exactly happened in Benghazi on 9/11/2012.
If it is true that Obama was trying to recover stinger-like weapons, Obama and many others are up to their neck in a scandal that will make Fast & Furious look minor by comparison. That is probably why the Obama administration is stalling. The truth will come out and when it does, it may ruin most everyone involved.
Remember, Holders got there back!
Guys, Last night Obama said that he was communicating with someone when the compound was being overrun… Who was he talking to and exactly when was it in the six hour gun fight?? Romney did not go back to that statement and I think that was a missed opportunity.
I’m a 40 year veteran and General Officer, I know that everyone in the chain of command had the same real time information that Ms. Lamb testified about. Any inquiry will tear the story apart that it was the result of a crowd because there are digital records. They all knew!! So the real question is why did he put out information HE knew was false.
For whatever political reason they pulled the security back and exposed the Ambassador to extreme danger. Someone is culpable for the four Americans deaths and they are all covering their a$$e$. This has to get investigated and not because of the changing story but because of who was responsible for the lack of security that caused the deaths of those four brave Americans….
Thank you.
Why is Barry putting out false information (Hillary too)? Based on this story, I think it is because they are being blackmailed by the terrorists who could easily bring their whole empire crashing down. They most certainly must be very nervous about any questions about Bhengalhi. Mitt was foiled in the town hall debate, but I believe the issue will emerge again in the upcoming debate.
If he’s being blackmailed he’s in a lose-lose situation…and probably doesn’t realize it
That the WH story hasn’t caused a media firestorm is just the latest sad example of their moral corruption.
The bigger issue is what the hell to do about the Muslim world.
Read “The Innocence of Infidels” at:
http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/
The ambassador was gay and he was visiting his Turkish boyfriend. That’s why this is so embarrassing.
yes, I saw that he was meeting a Turk in Benghazi. Who is this Turk diplomat?
Was it the Turk that tipped off his muslim brothers about the location of Stevens?
Everything went to shit after the Turk left. It’s like the muslim assault team was waiting for the Turk to get to safety.
Obama lies to a degree that is strange. Strange, not in the number of lies– which I would not even try to count— but his lying about events where truthfulness is easy to check. If a he went to a psychologist his reality testing would be questioned. It works to a degree that is alarming. Are we a nation of reality-testing challenged people?
In the middle east, the problems he created go beyond lying. His actions, for example, encouraged Palestinian extremists by publicizing positions even more extreme than the Palestinians had. Example: Israel must go back to pre 1967 borders BEFORE negotiations can begin. Example: assuring Iran that he would not participate if Israel stuck Iran. Example: Obama pushes for embracing the terrorist group- Muslim brotherhood, and pressuring to include them in the Egyptian government.
Is the commander is chief that naive? If not what is his agenda in the middle east
He is complicit with the enemies of America and Israel.
And the Bozo is almost certainly to be re-elected. What does that say about the American electorate?
Are you seriously blaming the electorate? Like they made the wrong choice?
The USURPERS excuse for the Benghazi FIASCO – The Intelligence Community let me down and did not have the information.
The USURPERS excuse for not confronting Iran – The Intelligence Community tells me they are a long long way from a bomb.
Anyone but me notice the cognitive dissonance here?
Another point regarding corrupt Left Wing Biased Moderator Crowleys’ performance. When Romney was responding to the USURPERS LIES she interupted him to Support the USURPER by confirming his LIES. She did so by consulting the “Transcript’ that she just happened to have of the USURPERS Rose Garden speech on 10/11/12 and then interpreting it INCORRECTLY and in the USURPERS favour.
Now that FALSE interpretation and interruption would alone have been damning enough but what else does it reveal. Well it reveals that of all the MILLIONS of document she COULD have had a copy of she just HAPPENED to have one which the USURPER wanted to spin his LIES about and whats more the USURPER KNEW she had that transcript too and no doubt KNEW she would misinterpret it in his favour.
She may have been given that document by the Obama team. Since it’s factual, she may not have thought about how it might compromise her neutrality. It was a set up — but I am thinking Candy may have also been duped. She did say at one point that Obama looked at her as if to say “well — speak up. What are the facts.” This was planned, but who was complicit is another question.
Obama is living in an ideological bubble. He believes many things that are disconnected from the truth. So he can’t judge which of his lies are credible.
Awfully convenient to have a movie (that noone had seen or heard about) to blame it on. Because one of my top priorities after I geta federal felony conviction is to make a movie that will inflame Muslims and put my fellow Coptic Christians (probably some relatives too) at risk.
people forget that the video story did not emerge in Washington but from someone at the US embassy in Cairo. However the public discussion by the planners of the demonstration of the Cairo embassy did not discuss the video previously.
The video hit the internet in July. There were 2 earlier attacks at the consulate in April and June. The last attack blew a hole in the gate that would have allowed 40 men to get through. So the video was an excuse for this tragedy and travesty; not the reason.
Why was the consulate left unguarded? Not only was extra security denied, but the security that was already in place was removed the month before the attack. This was a set-up that the administration is now trying to cover up. Was this a planned kidnapping, as is speculated elsewhere, of the unsuspecting yet fearful ambassador in exchange for the blind sheik that Morsi was demanding with the additional benefit of making Barry look like a great negotiator and foreign policy expert? Was the ambassador trying to buy back weapons our government gave Al Qaeda in order to overthrow Gaddafi and POTUS now feared this could turn into Fast & Furious II if they took down one of our planes? Why was the ambassador in Benghazi on the anniversary of 9/11 when the twitter chatter had the enemy announcing something was going down at that very consulate on that date? Was the ambassador ordered to Benghazi on that day, thereby setting him up to be captured and giving Obama the excuse to negotiate for his release in exchange for the blind sheik? We know there have already been discussions through the State Dept. for the sheik’s release, but that would enrage the American populace. Therefore, create a crisis for an exchange of prisoners? I didn’t believe it at first, but it’s starting to sound quite plausible to me now.
Mr. Rubin. It seems to me that you have surfaced an extremely important question, one that doesn’t seem to have been asked by anybody, including conservative media types. What was the ambassador doing in that dangerous place on that dangerous day with virtually no protection?
It may be the most important quetion of all, because it may put a laser beam on the entire tragically incompetant policy of the administration, rather than the also important, but less important issue of the cover-up.
imho, somebody with access to the Romney braintrust should call them regarding the matter.
true but what needs to happen is that intelligence people with access to the information come forward. i have been told by a reliable source the answer to this question but only under terms that i couldn’t discuss the specifics.
Mr. Rubin:
Iam wondering, as the assault was in progress one group of jihadist told the otherfighting jihadist: “Don’t shoot, we were sent by Morsi!” This was supposedly also captured on tape. Are you aware of this and, if so – where is this tape or rather in who’s possession is this tape?
Does no one else remember N Africa Al Qaeda saying the attack was retaliation for a Libyan taken out in a drone strike earlier in the year, June maybe? The statement came out a day or two after Benghazi. But once the media heard the official Obama line, they never mentioned it again. I’m starting to wonder if I imagined it, but I remember it vividly. My thought at the time was that those four people died because Obama was trying to hot dog by releasing both the existence of a “hit list” and that he personally decides who is targeted each week.
It wouldn’t surprise me if this admin lost weapons. Actually, I’d bet some of those RPGs and mortars used in Benghazi were supplied by BO. Maybe that was why the FBI couldn’t get to the scene for so long.
I remember that too.
Romney should have focused on branding Obama’s policy as ” power to the radicals “: Passivity in front of Iran nuclear race-Sirya butchery + helping the muslim brotherhood destroying our friend Mubarak and throwing out Khadafi our informant o the islamist mob + tightening the rope around Israel’s neck.That policy of empowering the enemies of the western world can be qualified as the work of a radical mole: Obama is a radical mole
Speaking of moles – and take this with a grain of salt – there was a guy who posted in the comments section of a blog called Expose Obama a month or so ago who claimed to be a former CIA agent who took part in the rescue from the Taliban in 2002 of Heather Mercer and another aid worker. He claimed to have maintained contacts within the Pakistani ISI and asked one of those contacts to investigate why Obama was in Pakistan in 1981. It took 2 1/2 years, but the ISI agent got back to him with an answer. The ISI agent claimed that Obama spent almost 2 months in a Muslim Brotherhood training camp in Baluchistan, Pakistan (on the border with Iran and India). The former CIA agent now considers Barry to be a sleeper cell.
Given the complaint of Michelle Bachmann and others in Congress that TMB operates within the administration in the WH and the State Dept. and has infiltrated our military, this claim may have some worth.
Makes sense to me
If it comes out that the administration lost weapons and some of those weapons later turn up in attacks on US soil it would be a bigger scandal than Watergate, with the easy potential to see Obama impeached and removed early in his second term if he gets one. The only problem is that watergate required the media in order for it to be exposed. Asking our media to hold this administration accountable is like asking Goebbels to audit Hitler.
The scandal may be simpler than lost weapons. The scandal may be that the Obama administration sold advanced American weapons to some “brave Libyan rebels” who turned out to be — Al Qaeda in the Mahgreb! Why not? The Obama administration had no idea whom they helping.
Why isn’t anyone talking about the fact that Christopher Stevens was gay? Obama deliberately sent a gay man into a society intolerant of homosexuals and thus has blood on his hands. In the name of political correctness towards homosexuals, Obama sacrificed an American citizen.
It seems I heard that he was dragged through the streets etc. but the narrative changed to that he died from smoke inhalation. Probably to cover up that fact and more.
My Fellow Americans,
On Nov. 6, 2012 we have to take our country back!
We will then send Obama and his lying “cronies” back to Chicago with his
side-kick Rahm Emanuel and the rest of his gangster friends! Good Riddance!
Our Constitution is expecting it of us and we better damn do it or we are done!
This issue invoked the weakest response from Romney. He belabored Obama for flying to fund raisers as news came in about the killings. This was a warm fuzzy, but off point. People must understand that somewhere, every day, a subordinate to the Commander-in=Chief is being killed in the line of duty. Bush, to his credit, spent hours writing condolences letters, and many, many visits with the bereaved. But it was possible. Roosevelt worked a war in which thousands were killed every day. It was impossible.
Obama led with his chin with a dumb statement, “But when it comes to our national security, I mean what I say.” Liars talk like that. Implicitly it means when I am talking about any thing other than national security, I lie through my teeth.
But his worst blunder was the attack that any criticism of him, while people are being murdered is a personal affront, over the top. Of course this is personal; this is war, and policy must be criticized. Romney could have nailed him with facts; the consulate was begging for armed defenders for months, but Washington told them to shut up (and thus die). Obama’s war policy is that the buck stops here, or here, or somewhere in the fog of war, such that no one is personally responsible and we must form a committee to study why our people die, unarmed, in combat.
Benghazi was a clear example of incompetent management, ideology causing blindness to a real enemy.
A better response by Romney could have ended this election.
I believe Romney did exactly what he meant to and should have. He is playing chess. Crowley cut him off and he correctly assessed she would continue to do so. He got Ob to commit to the statement that he declared it a terrorist attack the very next day. Monday, Romney will have a forum giving him the time, depth and breadth to then demand an explanation of, why, then, did Ob continue to campaign, fundraise, talk-show and United Nations, giving precedent to a video over the admitted terrorist attack ON OUR SOIL, explain the security lapse, Steven’s presence there, etc, ALL FOR 90 minutes with no place to hide! The last was a townhall. Ob does great surrounded by adoring supporters (his assumption). Mon is mano to mano and Ob will be his true self, like we saw in debate #1. He can’t stand up to Mitt alone.
Inside sources now say that Obama just called Bibi and begged him to attack Iran right now so that he can cancel the coming foriegn policy debate to play CIC.
President Obama, the second debate, telling the American people what his instructions were in the aftermath of the Benghazi massacre:
“Number two, investigate exactly what happened, regardless of where the facts lead us, to make sure that folks are held accountable and it doesn’t happen again.”
The folks are held accountable? Why, that would be YOU Mr. President. You went on to aver in that debate that YOU were responsible. Do those words have any meaning? No, of course not. YOUR administration failed to provide basic security to the Benghazi consulate. YOUR administration turned a deaf ear to the consulate’s appeal for increased security assets. YOUR administration, and YOU specifically, are responsible for the deaths of four brave Americans. And what is more, it is YOUR administration that immediately sought to COVER UP the fact that the consulate had been the premeditated target of a highly organized terrorist assault carried out by heavily armed al Qaeda forces. It is YOUR administration, and you yourself, who went before the United Nations to sell the LIE that the slaughter was the result of a YouTube video, which you pathetically assured the gathered nations of the world that your piss ant administration had nothing to do with. As if the humiliation and pain of Benghazi were not enough, YOU had to beg forgiveness for a slight that had NOTHING to do with the assault on sovereign American consulate territory.
This little man, and his little administration, CANNOT be allowed to take a pass on this. He takes full responsibility? Then let us exact our punishment.
One of the first acts of President Obama was to return the bust of Winston Churchill to Great Britain and to visit and bow to the King of Saudi Arabia.
>> To acknowledge the cause of the attack would have been to acknowledge the real threat in the Middle East and the embarrassing fact that American weapons had been given to terrorist, anti-American groups. Incidentally, far from learning anything in Libya, Obama is now doing precisely the same thing in Syria.
Well what is a bigger problem, an Iranian nuclear bomb or Islamicists gaining an upper hand in Syria? Romney says we should arm the Syrian opposition too, and rightly so because an Iranian nuke is THE nightmare scenario (Syria being the prime ally of Iran). But Rubin can’t understand “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. It isn’t that hard, and if Rubin thinks there are any better answers on Syria let’s hear it. Doing nothing only ensures the worst outcome will happen. Saint Rubin thinks the best course of action is to take no hand whatever we’ll feel better about ourselves. We’ll acting stupidly and not in our interests doesn’t make me feel good.
>> The debate ultimately focused on the rather narrow question of whether Obama had or had not immediately called the assassination a “terrorist attack.” This is a red herring. Inasmuch as Americans were murdered for non-criminal reasons, the attack was by definition terrorist.
Yes that is exactly the debate, and everyone knows it. Don’t go hyper-literal and then claim others don’t get it. We get it, and those are the words we’re using. Get over it. What we mean is your understanding of how it should be as you’ve stated it. Rubin has made a distinction without a difference.
Actually, Romney said precisely what I think in his Virginia speech and I wrote a few days ago that I supported his position..
I can’t find comments of yours that match what you’re saying. Why didn’t you link it?
Christopher Stevens was gay but he was also an arabist. he loved the arab culture despite the fact they view being gay as an abomination. He was no friend to Israel and thought that by speaking their language and embracing their customs that they would come to respect and love him. We know how this story goes in the Middle East and especially with Islamists. He may very well have been on the way to visit his Turkish boyfriend or, have been set up. We will never know the real reason….I’m sure this administration will see to that based on national security concerns.
Janet Arabs pay lip service to the Islamic condemnation of Homosexuals but in reality Homosexuality is rife in Arab countries mainly because most women and girls are locked behind doors and cannot go out without a MALE relative to guard them.
BTW in Islams paradise apart from the self repairing virgins on offer there are ‘Pearly’ Boys too as well as rivers of wine. In fact everything Muslims are supposed to AVOID in life. HYPOCRISY and Islam are no strangers
Check out the interview Obambi gave to Letterman shortly after Benghazi. At the beginning of that segment, Dave’s first question to BHO was whether this attack was an act of war. Obambi said NO! If this guy can’t even recognize what an act of war is, how can he be commander-in-chief?
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7422156n
I also dug Hillary’s excuse about “the fog of war”. The only fog around here is in her and Obambi’s heads.
So as soon as we found out that the Benghazi consulate was being overrun, I was on the phone with my national security team, and I gave them three instructions. Number one, beef up our security and — and — and procedures not just in Libya but every embassy and consulate in the region. Number two, investigate exactly what happened, regardless of where the facts lead us, to make sure that folks are held accountable and it doesn’t happen again. And number three, we are going to find out who did this, and we are going to hunt them down, because one of the things that I’ve said throughout my presidency is when folks mess with Americans, we go after them.
Look folks!! I will never claim to know it all about anything,, but there is a comment and quote from what Berry said that just bothers and yet tickles the cop of 15 years in me. He ya go “regardless of where the facts lead us” just what the heck could this statement mean?? That is what us in law enforcement call a RED FLAG if you are interviewing or interrogating someone. This is an inadvertent commitment of guilt. Or a challenge coming from a narcissistic person who believes that no matter what no one will ever figure out what really occurred and who is a player in the incident.
Good catch, Kris. Another thing that has been bothering me — why was the FBI kept out of Benghazi for all those weeks? “Couldn’t get the visas” just doesn’t cut it. Something’s fishy.
I should be a cop! That stood out to me and I didn’t know why. Thanks for clarifying!9I feel like we are playing ‘Clue’!
The USURPER can now be classed as one of two things
1) A Blatant Bare Faced LIAR
or –
2) INCOMPETENT.
I Myself think he is BOTH a Blatant Bare Faced Incompetent LIAR.
I don’t know if anybody in here realized it, but Obama, about half way through the debate was feeling confident enough to try a sort of half Biden clown laugh. The camera picked it up. I was waiting for it. But pretty much nothing came of it. Obama is a one trick pony. Clowning isn’t his thing.
Basically, he’s a total ideologue without one ounce of imagination. But who does know the hard left drill. For it was drilled into them at an early age.
People like Obama and Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn spend years with mentors; learning; trying to perfect the ability to lie about crucial things, mostly political. Their goal is to be convincing. Be great speech makers. One in particular in the 1930′s that comes easily to mind was a perfect example.
Barack Obama is maybe the best liar/speech maker I have ever run across.
A great advantage Obama has in this nation is that institutionally, when caught lying, he has groups in place to cover them up.
Of course, this includes Hollywood types (Heir Letterman is the first that comes to mind); it includes those who work for obama and those who volunteer for and believe in Obama.
In the revolution.
The most significant institution in the United States that covers up for Obama, as everyone knows, is this nation’s mainstream media.
This has gotten Obama through many tight jams during his Presidency.
The first example of this was when the Black Panther voter intimidators, in Philadephia on election day, subsequently got off scot free thanks to a corrupt attorney general. This was also in large part aided by, (what else?); an institution: the mainstream media who cheered when the miscreants got off.
The latest example of Obama almost being caught lying: his bold faced lie in the Rose Garden on Sept 12, 20112, just after the Benghazi attack.
Obama lied about calling the attackers “terrorists” something Obama never did.
In the rose garden talk, Obama used the phrase “acts of terror” as a generic comment, not a specific reference to the savages who attacked Benghazi.
However, during debate II, thanks to the non-insistence of Mitt Romney, and, more importantly, thanks to the lying of debate moderator, Candy Crowley who said Obama was correct, and subsequently, thanks to the mainstream media’s refusal to make this a front page issue, (top TV news story) Obama got away with the lie that averred that Obama, during the rose garden speech, called the Benghazi attackers, “terrorists”. Summarily untrue.
I go into detail about the importance of leftist/Marxists/totalitarians being able to lie with impunity because you can exchange the word, “lie”, with the word, kill, or imprison, or fire, or injure, or torture. The list is unending. All you need is to have the right people in the palm of your hand. Pay them off. Threaten them. Or 1939 of dealing: kill them.
See how dangerous it can get when consistently covered up wrongdoing is the reality?
When Obama took office on January 20, of 2009, he had no plan to liquidate all those who disagreed with him. He felt he could shut down Fox News from the bully pulpit. A stupid mistake.
He felt the United States could be changed without violence from within; that no blood (unlike what revolutionaries Bill Ayers thought in the 1960′s) would have to be shed. It made sense. Non violence would work.
I don’t think and never will think that Obama is a natural born killer, or a violent person in any way. He’s not wired that way. I think he has too much coward in him. He’d be afraid that one day he’d be on the wrong end of a short rope.
I hope you’re still with me because here it gets interesting.
Obama and his people, are being faced with a threat to their Pennsylvania Ave. kingdom. The threat seemed to appear out of nowhere. It did to most of us.
Possessing so much pride and arrogance and inexperience, Obamunists never envisioned being thrown off their election winning track. Ohio was the firewall that was to keep Obama President in 2013.
They never envisioned losing the election and all the money and power that goes along with it. They never envisioned a scenario that would cause the American people to turn against them. And force them to kiss all their revolutionary (non-violent) objectives, not to mention the money and power, goodbye.
When Obama totally mishandled the attack on Benghazi, the extremist revolutionary world of Mr.and Mrs. Obama began to spin off course, now it’s almost out of control. Her illegal clapping at the 2nd debate is like a fly in a hurricane.
Obviously, the extremist Obamunists are now getting desperate.
The second debate told them that Mitt Romney is not going away; that he’s more than a match for Obama.
In all likelihood, the Romney/Ryan ticket are a week away from running away with the election. In debate two, Obama got away by the skin of his teeth.
Mitt was a few well spoken, well placed sentences away from closing the deal with the American people. Here’s how the conversation might have gone:
Mitt:
“President Obama, if, as you say, you called the attackers “terrorists” in the rose garden, then how come you had Sue Rice appear on the Sunday morning news shows five days later, saying that, not terrorists, but a video caused the attack on Benghazi?
“President Obama, how come you, yourself, subsequently went on the View and Letterman and to the United Nations ranting about a video causing the attack on Benghazi? Never said a word about Benghazi terrorists.
“President Obama, that is the question. America demands answers.
“The answer is that in the rose garden speech you never called the attackers terrorists.
“I don’t care about Candy Crowley’s transcript. She’s wrong. It’s wrong. You’re lying to the American people. Ask Bill Clinton, when a President lies to the American people, it offends the American people.”
BACK TO RACHEL
But Mitt can’t think of everything; didn’t say that. So we have one more debate until he buries Obama with facts, and figures and stone cold logic.
So now what do you see pop up on Drudge Report for the first time? I pulled this from Drudge.
DRUDGE REPORT:
“Threats to Assassinate Romney Explode After Debate”
(COPY FOLLOWS)
Obama supporters voice desire to kill Romney over fears food stamps will be taken away
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
October 17, 2012
“Despite numerous media outlets attempting to downplay the issue, Twitter exploded last night following the debate with new threats from Obama supporters to assassinate Mitt Romney if he defeats Obama in the presidential race.
“As we reported yesterday, in addition to threats by Obama supporters to riot if Romney wins, innumerable Twitter users are also making direct death threats against Romney.
“The primary reason given for Obama supporters wanting to see Romney dead is the fear that he will take away food stamps. (rachel: a red herring)
(continuing to quote from Drudge)
“If the tables were turned and conservatives were making death threats against Obama in these numbers, it would be a national news story. Indeed, the mere act of hanging empty chairs from trees as a reference to Clint Eastwood’s RNC speech was hyped by the media as a deadly sign that conservatives were out to lynch black people if Obama won.
“However, the major networks have remained completely silent on the disturbing trend of Obama supporters threatening to resort to violence if their candidate fails to secure a second term.
“Twitchy has compiled a laundry list of assassination threats by Obama supporters made during and after the debate, and more continued to flood in this morning, including the following;” (end of quoting)
(and the article continues; if you want to read the rest, go on Drudge)
BACK TO RACHEL
Pause for concern?
You bet.
Party because the mainstream media won’t cover this news.
If Obama got tens of thousands of death threats it would be the number 1 story. Out of ten thousand death threats, ten to fifteen are usually the number that’s significant.
So what do we have now?
A Republican about to beat the smithereens out of the leftist/totalitarian candidate who wants to bankrupt America. Fundamentally transform it. And the American people have caught on. The surge is to Romney.
And you have, despite the mainstream media being in cahoots with the Obama gang, an unforeseen (at least by ObamaPeople) foreign event.
The death of four American government officials and an incredible, lie filled designed coverup,complements of Obama, which was designed to deflect blame away from Obama while keeping Obama’s fantasy Middle East narrative in pure virgin tact regarding Obama’s boast that he has Al Quade on the ropes.
Yes, desperate men do desperate things. But, in American politics, violence isn’t our style. Violent words, maybe, but not actions.
In America, a lost election ends up being simply a lost election on the theory that we’re all Americans. All, in the end, pulling the rope in the same direction.
But this is different. Those days, at least for now, are gone.
I suggest Obama and Romney take this stuff seriously.
I cleaned up most of the nuts on our deck this afternoon.
But there are too many nuts in this world running around, and I’m asking the powers that be to start getting out their rakes. I don’t want anybody to get hurt. I lived through the Kennedy’s. Please, somebody, do something. Losing, even to Obama, doesn’t really scare me.
Nuts really do. Heck, I’m just a girl.
Fundamentally, what went wrong was the liberal take on dealing with Islam.
Their Achilles heel is the truth about Mohammad himself.
Read “The Innocence of Infidels” at:
http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/
These are the real issues:
The President who hates the second amendment armed drug lords in Mexico. Fast and Furious killed a border agent and numerous innocent Mexicans. First cover-up.
In the second debate, Obama got away with saying that he had characterized the attack on the Benghazi consulate as a terrorist incident because the moderator confirmed his point; in fact he misrepresented the facts when he said “The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people and the world that … this was an act of terror.” Reince Priebus, the Republican party chairman, instantly seized on this inaccuracy and accused Obama of lying and others are sure to follow suit. This inaccuracy will likely haunt Obama over the next three weeks and turn the Libyan fiasco into an even bigger problem for his reelection campaign.
The same President who hates the second amendment armed our enemies, the terrorists in Libya. Second cover-up. Almost entirely missing from the debate surrounding the anti-U.S. attacks in Libya is the administration’s policy of arming jihadists to overthrow Mideast governments. But in the case of Libya, the arming of jihadists may have directly resulted in the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks against the U.S. consulate in Benghazi and the subsequent murder of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith, private security employees and former U.S. Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.
After changing its story multiple times, the White House finally conceded the deadly assault on the U.S. consulate was a planned attack linked to al-Qaida, as per information released by national intelligence agencies.
The admission prompted Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., to call for the resignation of U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice for pushing the narrative that the attacks were part of a spontaneous uprising.
King may instead want to focus his investigative energies on the larger story: How the Obama administration armed Libyan rebels who were known to include al-Qaida and other anti-Western jihadists, and how the White House is currently continuing that same policy in Syria.
During the revolution against Muammar Gadhafi’s regime, the U.S. admitted to directly arming the rebel groups.
At the time, rebel leader Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi boasted in an interview that a significant number of the Libyan rebels were al-Qaida gunmen, many of whom had fought U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Hasidi insisted his fighters “are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists,” but he added that the “members of al-Qaida are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader.”
Even Adm. James Stavridis, NATO supreme commander for Europe, admitted during the Libyan revolution that Libya’s rebel force may include al-Qaida: “We have seen flickers in the intelligence of potential al-Qaida, Hezbollah.”
WHY WAS AMBASSADOR STEVENS KILLED? Oh for a Watergate!!!
Let’s make this front and center. Keep writing about it. Keep blogging it.
hmmm, this sounds like the libyan version of “fast and furious.”
Romney needs to bring this up in the next debate in detail, not summarize quickly as he did this time. The folks who will vote Republican because they would like to prevent America from going bankrupt have already decided or voted. Many Americans are not aware of the threat of Islam both in the Middle East and here and Romney could win points by making this clear in the final debate. Here he will step on the toes of the Muslim-in-Chief and Obama will lose his cool.
I agree with you but Romney will have to be a little more subtle since many people don’t accept the fact that we are quietly having our freedoms undermined in the U.S. by Islamists. The fact that Holder, Perez and H. Clinton have had meetings with American groups with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood to figure out a way to implement U.N. Resolution 16/18 which would effectively criminalize free speech has gone unnoticed by the general public. Thank you to the MSM.
Please no more hope in OBAMNEY
“The father of slain Ambassador Chris Stevens doesn’t want politicians exploiting his son’s death” Obama will use this to try to defuse the issue in the debate on Monday — lots of people will buy it. It’s exploitative. Sorry, Steven’s dad” — but the issue is already political and many others may be at risk. http://tinyurl.com/9fq32wu
Not “figuratively”–Obama LITERALLY ran off to Vegas, and he is still LITERALLY running away from any responsible governance of this country. When the going gets tough, Obama plays golf.
Howdy Mr. Rubin,
Why are you not covering the film-trailer maker who is not a Christian but a Muslim (as reported by Walid Shoebat), and who placed the trailer on the internet several months ahead of time, so (probably) it could be used at the proper time to silence free speech in America? This explains why Obama spent so much time advocating that the whole scene over there was a justified response to the video trailer, and implying that any other criticism of Islam is unacceptable. At the same time calls were/are coming for criminalizing denigration of religion (but intended for use in cases of denigration of Islam). The release of the “blind sheik” also figure in this.
There’s no point in covering Libya unless the full story is told. Obama’s pattern of facilitating the emergence of the Muslim Brotherhood and other Salafists, because of his sympathy (or should I say solidarity) for them, and it’s implication for change in America are the reason for coverage of the Libyan events. If you don’t understand this, you are way behind the learning curve. Would Romney have been able to articulate this information should the moderator not have intervened in Obama’s behalf and to rescue him from certain exposure?
Furthermore, it’s obvious that Obama is waging a successful campaign to block Iran in the Middle East with Sunni Islam if a major war does not erupt in the process.
Get back to glwclimb@sti.net
“So as soon as we found out that the Benghazi consulate was being overrun, I was on the phone with my national security team, and I gave them three instructions. Number one, beef up our security and — and — and procedures not just in Libya but every embassy and consulate in the region. Number two, investigate exactly what happened, regardless of where the facts lead us, to make sure that folks are held accountable and it doesn’t happen again. And number three, we are going to find out who did this, and we are going to hunt them down, because one of the things that I’ve said throughout my presidency is when folks mess with Americans, we go after them.”
I have yet to see anyone take on the disconnect between, “So as soon as we found out that the Benghazi consulate was being overrun, [my emphasis] I was on the phone with my national security team, and I gave them three instructions.”, the present tense and the past tense in “Number two, investigate exactly what happened, [mine].
So which is it; as the attack was under way or after the fact? Col David Hunt has maintained that upwards of 200 people in various governmental ” agencies” listened to the events “live”: http://audio.wrko.com/a/64657882/col-hunt-on-the-newest-libyan-revelations.htm and yet we did nothing! Col Hunt’s comments are 7 minutes long and well worth listening to.
It would appear that Obama only found out after Benghazi had fallen rather than in real time as Charlene Lamb has testified to congressional committee, which would cause you wonder how the POTUS could be absent from a 6 hour battle involving our ambassador and yet be involved “real time” with the killing of Bin Laden?
Obviously, he wasn’t Commander-in-Chief of any aid for our besieged consulate – another “present” vote ?
Sorry – didn’t realize BOLD type wouldn’t show:
“was being overrun,” [my emphasis]
“what happened,” [mine].
and funneling weapons to drug cartels in Mexico.
Nice guy? I think not
Ambassador Chris Stevens returned to Tripoli in early September from a trip to Europe. It was a critical time for the new Libya with its western-supplied new leaders. A new president and prime minister, men without any political experience, had been elected by the new Libya parliament. Stevens was needed to help the budding government.
But Stevens had other priorities. Eastern Libya, a hotbed of jihadist revolutionaries, people whom Stevens had organized a year ago in Benghazi to overthrow the Libya government, were needed in Syria along with weapons. (His decision to go to Benghazi and play spook again would kill him.)
The Eastern Libyan city of Benghazi has become the North African supply hub for weapons and foreign fighters arriving for regime change operations in Syria. Liwaa Al-Umma -”Community brigade” – from Libya. the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), an affiliate of Al Qaeda, is now in Syria fighting for the US against Iran ally Syria.
The dozen or more cIA agents in Benghazi were supposedly there to round up dangerous weapons in the war-torn nation, and destroy them. Apparently they failed on the destruction part.
Stevens’ last official function on 9/11, according to news reports, was a meeting with the Turkish ambassador. In Benghazi. Not at the “consulate” — there was no consulate in Benghazi. It was purely a CIA operation. During this time – -
The Times<, Sep 14, 2012
Syrian rebels squabble over weapons as biggest shipload arrives from Libya
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/middleeast/article3537770.ece
I imagine that besides SA-7′s there were also Russian Igla-S (SA-24) shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles that had been sold to Libya and stolen from military warehouses during the rebellion there last year. The SA-24′s have shown up in Gaza. The SA-24 “Grinch” is very dangerous. It has a range of some three miles, a powerful warhead, and a guidance system that lets it find targets at night. It is similar to the U.S. Stinger that so distressed the Soviets in Afghanistan. Introduced in 1983, it can hit a plane at 11,000 feet. It can also down drones and cruise missiles, and helicopters are toast.
“A game-changer” for the Syria rebels, and so Stevens had to be there in Benghazi.
There is one issue with the LYING USURPER and the biased moderator which deserves far more in depth investigation.
When they were discussing Benghazi Romney made the point ” you never called it Terrorism for two weeks” . Obama made a sneering face then instructed the moderator ‘Get the transcript’ which she then held up and completely misinterpreted it in the USURPERS favour.
This raises some extremely important questions.
1) Of all the millions of debate relevant documents she could possibly have transcripts of why did she have that one.
2) How did Obama KNOW she had it and why was he so SURE she would support HIS contention regarding it.
It is impossible that he guessed she might have it and impossible that just by chance she had it too. Quite clearly there was pre-debate collaboration between the USURPER and the moderator.
Afghanistan–United States relations can be traced to 1921[1] but the first contact between the two occurred further back in 1830s when the first recorded person from the United States was visiting Afghanistan.[2] In the last decade, Afghan-American relations have become stronger than ever before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan–United_States_relations