A.P Dillon on Social Media
Got PayPal? Donate Today!
Donate Other Ways
Got News? Get the Newsletter.
LATEST LL1885 POSTS
- New Hanover substitute teacher arrested for peeing in a cup in front of students
- #WCPSS Updates: District won’t turn over MVP Math docs, Enrollment estimates drop, and magnet priorities
- NCED Updates: New Hanover Predators, Istation, Common Core, Leandro, NCAE & Elections
- #WCPSS Updates: Another “Equity” camp, Literacy, a brawl and other headlines
- #NCED Updates: School Choice Week, NCAE Strike, Istation updates and Teacher Turnover
- Cleveland County teacher arrested for propositioning 15-year-old boy using social media
- New Hanover Band teacher arrested on 12 felony counts (Updated: Teacher fired)
ARCHIVES BY CATEGORY
Category Archives: Foreign Affairs
A hacker going by the name ‘Guccifer’ has intercepted emails from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to a former Clinton administration assistant, Sidney Blumenthal; some pertaining to the attack in Benghazi. Let’s set aside that Blumenthal holds no official office and that Clinton was discussing this with him rather than with someone who should be involved, like perhaps Leon Panetta or the President, and focus on the zeroing in on the YouTube video.
Russia Today has released excerpts of what are said to be highly sensitive emails sent from a former Clinton administration staffer to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton following the September attacks on the consulate in Benghazi, obtained this week by a hacker known as “Guccifer.”
“Guccifer” claims to have obtained the emails by compromising the AOL account of Sidney Blumenthal, a former assistant to President Bill Clinton. If authentic, the emails appear to contain information about the Benghazi attack, and were leaked by the hacker to a number of select news outlets and other individuals, including many members of Congress.
The Breitbart piece links to the Russia Today article, that contains this paragraph:
According to the Blumenthal memos, though, even the US secretary of state was being fed disinformation directly after the attack. In the email dated Sept. 12, Sec. Clinton is told that the anti-Islamic film was likely the catalyst for the assault.
“A senior security officer told [interim Libyan President Mohammed Yussef] el Magariaf that the attacks on that day were inspired by what many devout Libyans viewed as a sacrilegious internet video on the prophet Mohammed originating in America,” the memo reads. “The Libya attacks were also inspired by and linked to an attack on the US mission in Egypt on the same day.”
Elsewhere in the first memo, Blumenthal tells Clinton that another source had even more to say about the assault:
“According to a separate sensitive source, el Magariaf noted that his opponents had often tried to connect him to the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) through the National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL), a group established in opposition to former dictator Muammar al-Gaddafi, which el Magariaf led in the 1980s. In the opinion of this individual el Magariaf believes that he can survive potential negative publicity in this regard, but if this situation continues to develop in this manner it will complicate his efforts to establish an orderly administration in the country. Again, he stated that the attacks on the US missions were as much a result of the atmosphere created by this campaign, as the controversial video.”
We’re back to the obscure YouTube video as an excuse for ignoring multiple warnings, including several from Ambassador Stevens, in the days prior to the attack. This ‘source’ Blumenthal was talking to was clearly not correct, as we see the quote below regarding being warned about a pre-planned attack. Continue reading
I recently reported Panetta’s incredible statement that the President was not around during the night of the Benghazi attack. Now, it’s confirmed. The night four Americans were murdered at the hands of terrorists in Benghazi, President Obama was not involved. No calls were made by him nor did any instructions come from him as an over 8 hour engagement raged at our consulate. Was he just too busy getting some shut-eye so he could jet off to Vegas the next day?
Utter dereliction of duty:
President Obama didn’t make any phone calls the night of the Sept. 11 attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, the White House said in a letter to Congress released Thursday.
“During the entire attack, the president of the United States never picked up the phone to put the weight of his office in the mix,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, who had held up Mr. Obama’s defense secretary nominee to force the information to be released.
“We still don’t know what the president of the United States was doing the night of the attack and who he was talking to. We know who he wasn’t talking to,” Mr. McCain said.
(Source: Washington Times)
More deck chair shuffling.
So now we are to believe that the Commander-in-Chief was briefed and then just went missing while Americans fought for their lives abroad? Remember, this past Fall this administration made the claim that the President not participating in the ongoing Benghazi investigation. This disinterest and lack of participation easily can be viewed as the first step in protecting the President from future fallout. That begs the question: Is this recent declaration a move to further insulate the President from coming revelations by removing him from the equation completely? It would certainly seem so. If this was a Republican President who just admitted this, we’d already be gearing up for impeachment.
Gross negligence or willfully dismissing the events – to borrow from Mrs. Clinton, “What difference does it make?” No matter how you try to put this one in context, the President was AWOL from his primary job: defending Americans and their interests.
We are pretty sure at this point that Ambassador Stevens was involved in the running of guns and weapons to Syria; some with the assistance of the Turkey. This scenario is a likely tie in with the White House now standing firm that the President had nothing to do with what happened on 9/11 in Benghazi.
More from NiceDeb: Senator Graham: “Benghazi Was About Breakdown of Security, Failure of Leadership, and a Prez Who Was Virtually Disengaged” (Video)
U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) held a press conference, today, to make a statement in response to Obama’s letter acknowledging he did not call anyone in Libya on September 11, 2012 during the 8 hours the U.S. mission was under attack. He didn’t pick up the phone to call any government officials in Libya until Sept. 12, after everyone was dead.
If it were not for the three of us and other colleagues, you would still believe – the American people would still believe that this was a spontaneous event caused by a hateful video, Graham told reporters. “That’s what was being told by Susan Rice five days after the attack, that’s what was being said by the POTUS for weeks. The reason we know that’s not true, is because we dug, and we pushed, and we prodded. And now we know, that during the entire attack, POTUS never picked up the phone to put the weight of his office into the mix, and there’s no stronger voice in the world than the President of the United States.”
Video via NiceDeb:[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hYA9MJ2MpUc]
“The record needs to be clear”, Graham continued, “this was not about a hateful video, it was about a breakdown of national security, it was about an ambassador who was begging the State Dept. to send reinforcements for months, this was about a deteriorating security situation, this is about a attack you could see coming, this is about a complete failure of leadership Sec of Defense never talked to the Sec of State, and a President who as far as we know was virtually disengaged.”
He concluded, “America needs to learn what happened, and we need to learn from our mistakes.”
Yes, we do need to know what happened — with the White House confirming this President,in essence, blew off his job, the time to request an independent counsel has come.
Still more from Politico:
President Barack Obama did not speak with Libyan leaders as the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was under way last September, the White House acknowleged Thursday in a letter to lawmakers.
White House Counsel Kathy Ruemmler said then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did reach out to Libyan President Mohamed Magariaf at Obama’s request on the same day the attack began, but Obama didn’t personally call the Libyan leader until the following night.
“Secretary Clinton called Libyan President Magariaf on behalf of the president on the evening of September 11, 2012 to coordinate additional support to protect Americans in Libya and access to Libyan territory. At that time, President Magariaf expressed his condemnation and condolences and pledged his government’s full cooperation,” Ruemmler wrote. “The President spoke to President Magariaf on the evening of September 12.”
The big story here is that our President was absent as an act of war was committed but the other big story here is that, according to this letter, Hillary Clinton was the only one on record having communicated with Libyan officials. Now that she’s gone, the narrative is being steered her way. Convenient.
Flashback to Obama on Responsibility:
Obama did not provide a direct answer, but said: “When I say that we are going to find out exactly what happened, everybody will be held accountable, and I am ultimately responsible for what’s taking place there, because these are my folks, and I’m the one who has to greet those coffins when they come home, you know that I mean what I say.” (Source: FOX)
The buck stops here…or in my bed or Vegas. Whatever.
In an interview that aired today, President Obama said that “if we find out that there was a big breakdown and somebody didn’t do their job” regarding the attack on the U.S. outposts in Benghazi, Libya, “then they’ll be held responsible.” (Source: ABC)
Well, funny he should say that since HE was the one not doing his job.
Small wonder we have no photos from the situation room that night. According to the White House, he wasn’t even there. This confirmation of his absence makes his junkyard dog act at the press conference where he defended Susan Rice all the more insulting. The President stood in the room and defended a woman he sent out to lie to the American people, but the lie about the YouTube video wasn’t the only lie. She was out there distracting from the fact he was nowhere to be found during the attack.
Flashback: Obama the next day… (Transcript here.)[youtube=http://youtu.be/rKC_dzl3ksA]
…and then he jetted off to Vegas.
More from LL1885 on Benghazi here and here. Continue reading
Hillary Clinton finally made her way to Congress and testified on the Benghazi attacks this week. She managed to not wipe out again, God bless her. We were treated to quite a spectacle — and a double feature one at that, as Clinton testified before the House Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
She lied, obfuscated, possibly committed perjury and enjoyed having her ass kissed by every single Democrat prior to their asking her questions the equivalent of, ‘so, how’s the weather?’. It was less of a hearing and more of a groupie love fest. Clinton took responsibility yet only for what she wanted to. Nothing of any consequence was her fault. Clinton is Secretary of State, yet claimed to know nothing very useful. Instead, we should all look forward to how we can stop this from happening in the future. She referred back to ARB on nearly every question. It was pathetic and infuriating, but typical and expected testimony.
Only a few managed to ask her with any questions of any depth. None of them were Democrats. What a shocker, right? Rep. Rand Paul, Sen. John McCain, Rep. Jeff Duncan and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher were the only ones to land any real punches.
As Bryan Preston at the PJ Tatler notes:
As a result, they never laid a glove on her.
As a result, the Benghazi cover-up remains covered up.
As a result, accountability is dead in Washington. At least, for Democrats. It’s still open season on Republicans.
There was so much wrong with her testimony, it is hard to know where to start. Let’s hit the high notes. First, let’s review:[youtube=http://youtu.be/uFf0dUH3OtU]
The YouTube Video being the reason for the Benghazi attack was a lie told by every major mouthpiece of this administration. Got all that? Good. Now, read on.
“What difference does it make?!”
Image Via Weasel Zippers
The most remembered part of her entire testimony, and one that will come back to haunt her should she decide to run in 2016, was when she blew up at Sen. Ron Johnson when he dared question her why this administration lied for almost a month about the cause of the attack:[youtube=http://youtu.be/JFZytEUCXu4]
When she came out with this all I could see were flashbacks to Bill and his ring-around-the rosy semantics games, lying and denials of having ‘sexual relations with that woman’. Same tactic, just with some judo-chop action to the table and a few crocodile tears.
It makes a big difference to one person I can think of right off the top of my head. Claiming you never saw or heard about the cables from Ambassador Stevens that detailed specific threats and were begging for more security is at best comparable to saying the dog ate your homework. You’re Secretary of State. One of your primary job descriptors is to keep our embassies, consulates and personnel overseas secure and safe. You failed. Bang your fists on whatever desks you want, your kabuki theater is insulting.
Madam Secretary, that you seem to think that perpetrating as monstrous a lie as this administration did, blaming a YouTube trailer when you knew damn well that wasn’t the case, somehow doesn’t matter at this point is beyond astounding. It matters — it was lie willingly and knowingly told by this administration and by you too, madam. It was a lie told in desperation to cover up something bigger or to just cover your own ass for gross negligence of duty and failed leadership. I think it might be both and that’s horrific. (Related: Hillary Clinton still refuses to say Benghazi wasn’t caused by the Muhammad video » The Right Scoop )
It’s the funding
It wasn’t overly long before an attempt to blame the lack of security on funding cuts, by Republicans of course. Rep. George Meeks pushed the funding lie back into view after he wiped the drool from his chin. Rep. Engel was eager to pile on. Just ignore the wasted millions Clinton spent on a consulate that will never open. Nothing to see there. (Read: It’s True. Hillary Clinton State Department Blew $80 Million on Mazar-e Sharif Consulate That Will Never Open | The Gateway Pundit)
The lack of funding issue had already been debunked in the initial hearings by Charlene Lamb, but why trouble ourselves with facts. You can read Lamb’s testimony here. (Related: State Dep’t rep: “We had the correct number of [security] assets in Benghazi” « Hot Air) Pretty soon, it wasn’t just funding cuts, somehow Bush and WMD’s were to blame, courtesy of the Congressional Village Idiot, Dick Durbin.
Two thing stick out to me in her testimony overall. One – Clinton contradicted known statements about watching the siege live. Two – Throughout the two sessions, Clinton denied seeing or knowing about cables from Ambassador Stevens, yet multiple times she refers to all of the critical information she has readily available to her from a variety of sources. Clinton even went as far as to detail several past and current threats. Either she’s lying or she’s more incompetent than talk show puppet Susan Rice. My money is on lying; there is no way she could have not been aware of the threats posed there given number of them and the history. Colleague and LL1885 Blog author, Liberty Speaks, has sent me a .pdf of the declassified cables dealing with concerns over security in Benghazi which are located on Scribd. I would encourage reading them. Of interest: Pgs. 38, 42-45, 52.
In summary: Dog and Pony Show.
Sharyl Attkisson has her work cut out for her. Still.
No one has been fired. Clinton is responsible but won’t answer any questions; according to her testimony, we just have to make sure this doesn’t happen again and stop trying to get to the bottom of it.
No one has been named as responsible for cutting the security.
No answer on why no help was sent, just excuses.
No answer on why this administration chose to push an obvious lie (the video) on the American people and the world, resulting in the jailing of an American citizen.
Clinton on Benghazi story confusion: ‘What difference at this point does it make!?’ [VIDEO] – The Daily Caller
Rand Paul to Hillary: Let’s face it, you should have been fired over Benghazi – Hot Air
Video: Rep. Duncan to Hillary: “I’ll tell you what difference it makes…” – Nice Deb
GOP Congressman To Clinton: “The Only Person That’s In Jail Right Now Is The [Mohammed] Filmmaker”… – Weasel Zippers
Rep. Duncan to Hillary: You let the consulate in Benghazi become a death trap – The Right Scoop
Rand Paul slams Hillary: If I had been president I would have fired you – The Right Scoop
It’s worth noting that there will likely be an all out assault coming forthwith on Rand Paul by the media and the rest of the institutional Left.
Barbara Boxer tries to launch Hillary’s 2016 campaign at Benghazi hearing – Michelle Malkin
GOP Congressman: ‘I Just Wish You Had Won the Democratic Primary in 2008’ – The Weekly Standard
Related Must Reads:
JW Special Report: “The Benghazi Attack of September 11, 2012: Analysis and Further Questions” – Judicial Watch
Rush: No ‘coincidence’ Hillary debt was paid the week of Benghazi hearings – The Daily Caller
“What Difference Does it Make?” Plenty – Commentary Magazine
3 Incredibly Outrageous Evasions by Hillary Clinton About Benghazi – Hit & Run : Reason.com
6 Things You Need to Know About Clinton’s Benghazi Testimony – Washington Free Beacon
Why it matters whether Benghazi was terrorism or not. – Moe Lane
State Dept Does Nothing About Benghazi Attackers, But Algeria Does – Maggie’s Notebook
Sept. 11 Benghazi attackers found among terrorists attacking Algerian gas complex – The Right Scoop
LL1885’s posts on Benghazi and Benghazi-gate Continue reading
A random act of journalism from CNN. Hat tip to Bare Naked Islam for this clip:[youtube=http://youtu.be/QYiXRNBcF6s]
“One thing is clear…there IS a Libya connection.”
The report goes right out and states up front: terror camps are all over Libya with direct ties to Al Qaeda. So much for Al Qaeda being dead, Mr. President. You haven’t dismantled anything, you’re “smart diplomacy” has actually revived terrorist groups in the Middle East and elsewhere.
“Libya is a lesson in what the international community can achieve and is a recipe for the future.”
Yeah, a lesson in how to get the weapons you need to carry out your plots, courtesy of this administration. All you’ll get is harsh condemnations from Panetta, and possibly a drone strike or ten, while this administration sends more weapons, financial “aid” and other goodies to arm more terrorists rebels in the region. Threats mean little when it was that easy to take out a U.S. consulate and kill 4 Americans in Libya. Drone strikes aren’t deterring, they’re ticking off these groups. Benghazi was clear proof of that. Al Qaeda isn’t backing down, they are energized.
Hillary Clinton is set to testify this week, assuming she doesn’t wipe out again. I’m sure her testimony will be less than enlightening and full of more buck passing.
“I was not personally aware of any request,” Obama said Friday, adding that there is an “infrastructure” in place to “manage requests.” – Source: Fox News
Hillary Clinton seems incapable of throwing Obama under his own bus. Perhaps I am underestimating her — after all, she is married to the Teflon President. Maybe she’ll actually give some useful information. Some questions Clinton should be asked, which may be redundant with other hearings to date, but are valid since no one has sufficiently answered them:
Where are the survivors? Why has the committee not been given access to them?
Why, after multiple requests, did you not reinforce the Benghazi consulate? We know Clinton requested it and Obama denied it. Hillary and Bill put together a legal team, so clearly some big piece in this picture is Hillary’s to play show and tell with.
Why was no additional support sent when the fighting broke out? Panetta’s statements on it are full of so much crap one could fertilize half of this country’s farms with it. Panetta claimed unclear early Info slowed Benghazi response. Panetta then said they ‘could not put forces at risk’. Panetta went further and stated that they had ‘no real time intel’. Yet, within the very hour hostilities began, a CIA team from Tripoli headed to Benghazi and those back in the White House Situation Room were watching events unravel live via drone. Sources say even the President was in attendance.
Why the lie about a YouTube Video being to blame? Who decided that was the official cover story? The average citizen watching this unfold could tell you this was not about a stupid YouTube trailer — especially not one that only had a hundred or so hits on the day protests broke out. The President, thirteen days later, continued to push this lie but not just on the American people — he did it in front of the U.N. in a globally televised speech. Let us not forget useful stooge, Susan Rice, in this lying either. Haven’t heard a peep about her since she sent her sob letter to the President. Come to think of it, Obama’s debate defender, Candy Crowley, has been silent as well.
Just a reminder of the lies and the liars headed into this week’s testimony:[youtube=http://youtu.be/uFf0dUH3OtU]
Read more from LL1885 on Benghazi here and here. Continue reading
Was what happened in Benghazi some kind of turf war for weaponry in a Middle East version of Fast and Furious after all? If so, that would explain a lot of the lying if the Obama administration were supplying weapons to one group over another under the radar; busting some of their own narratives.
PJ Tatler, emphasis mine:
Libya Blowback: US Missiles intercepted in Egypt bound for Hamas-controlled Gaza
A stunning story out of Egypt on Friday (HT: Jonathan Schanzer at FDD) after a raid in northern Sinai uncovered a cache of anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles bound for Hamas-controlled Gaza. The discovery was made in Be’r al-Hefn near Arish in an area known as a transit point for materials headed for the smuggling tunnels running from Sinai into Gaza.
The most remarkable part of the story is that the missiles were American-made, arriving from Libya according to multiple reports.
The report does not say who or what group is associated with transporting the weaponry from Libya through Egypt to the point where they were discovered; one would guess from the destination it would have to be HAMAS. So, how and from whom is HAMAS getting weapons from Libya?
This is not the first time in recent memory arms originating in Libya have been intercepted in Egypt before reaching Gaza. Flashback to November 2012 when 3 Palestinians were arrested: Gaza bound weapons intercepted in Egypt. That was a very pricey shipment. The Times Of Israel noted it was worth $3.3 Million:
According to the report, the shipment included 185 crates full of arms and ammunition, including bullets, anti-tank and anti-aircraft munitions, rocket-propelled grenades, landmines and explosives. The estimated value of the shipment was 20 million Egyptian pounds ($3.3 million).
$3.3 million is not chump change. Neither is $192 million and $400 million. Anyone thinking the bulk of this money was really going to help the Palestinian people is kidding themselves.
It’s entirely plausible that these weapons being bought are being redirected from arms meant for Syria. The Oversight committee should be asking Hillary Clinton about the various arms being shipped in and out of the region – specifically Libya. They should also be asking about the intended recipients of said weapons and how involved Ambassador Stevens was in brokering deals with the intended the recipients of these arms in the region. How much of Ambassador Stevens’ role in returning to the region was to try and recover weapons the US sold the Gaddafi regime? Or another idea, maybe he was trying to buy back items already in country for transfer to various rebel groups in Libya and in Syria.
The reality — We probably will never know the answers to these questions.
Obama Quietly Removes HAMAS Terrorist Muhammad Salah From Terrorist List; May Get $1.4 Million in HAMAS/Qaeda Funds
President Obama Authorizes Covert Help for Libyan Rebels
REPORT: The US Is Openly Sending Heavy Weapons From Libya To Syrian Rebels
Obama asks Saudis to send weapons to Libyan rebels
BenghaziGate: Obama Admin Knew Libyan Terrorists Had US-Provided Weapons Continue reading
I’m beginning to think this President is at worst, a pathological liar or at best, Bipolar. A month ago, he was barking like a junkyard dog in defense of Susan Rice, after admitting he sent her out to lie to the nation. Now we get this from Obama on Benghazi (via MSNBC):
GREGORY: In the politics, in the back and forth in this, do you feel like you let your friend Susan Rice hang out there to dry a little bit?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: No. First of all, I think I was very clear throughout that Susan has been an outstanding U.N. ambassador for the United States. She appeared on a number of television shows reporting what she and we understood to be the best information at the time. This was a politically motivated attack on her. I mean of all the people in my national security team she probably had the least to do with anything that happened in Benghazi. Why she was targeted individually for the kind of attacks that she was subjected to is– is– was puzzling to me. And I was very clear in the days after those attacks that they weren’t acceptable. So, you know, the good thing is– is that I think she will continue to serve at the U.N. and do an outstanding job. And I think that most Americans recognize that these were largely politically motivated attacked– attacks as opposed to being justified.
Politically motivated? Mr. President, you admitted YOU sent her out there. We all now know that both of you knew at the time you set her out to the talk show circuit that what she was telling the nation was a lie. The criticism of Rice was not about politics, it was about LYING. It still is about lying.
The Blamer-in-Chief just prior to these remarks on Rice said this about our Embassy security, emphasis added is mine:
Some individuals have been held accountable inside of the State Department and what I’ve said is that we are going to fix this to make sure that this does not happen again, because these are folks that I send into the field. We understand that there are dangers involved but, you know, when you read the report and it confirms what we had already seen, you know, based on some of our internal reviews; there was just some sloppiness, not intentional, in terms of how we secure embassies in areas where you essentially don’t have governments that have a lot of capacity to protect those embassies. So we’re doing a thorough-going review. Not only will we implement all the recommendations that were made, but we’ll try to do more than that. You know, with respect to who carried it out, that’s an ongoing investigation. The FBI has sent individuals to Libya repeatedly. We have some very good leads, but this is not something that, you know, I’m going to be at liberty to talk about right now.
Again, Mr. President — you’re trying to install an unsupported narrative here. This embassy was vulnerable for at least the 6 months prior to the attack on September 11th; it had been attacks twice prior. The security of this consulate was already at a dangerously low level. There were warnings three days before the attack, which were ignored. Even the Ambassador himself asked multiple times for more security. Instead of granting those requests, his security was actually cut back. (Related: State Department withdrew 16-member special forces team from Benghazi one month before 9/11/12 terrorist attack)
This is not about sloppiness. Sloppiness implies security was implemented, but did it in a manner leaving things in a state disarray. Mr. President, you didn’t implement anything, you removed it and in doing so, thereby leaving your Ambassador Stevens and his staff wide open to attacks. Attacks this administration was warned about from several sources. What transpired wasn’t sloppiness, it was criminal.
By the way, Nakoula was unavailable for comment.
Related Reading from LL1885:
#BENGHAZI: Psych! No Real Resignations.
#BENGHAZI – A Concussion, A Hearing and More Dodging
#Benghazi: Hillary Takes A Spill; Won’t Testify
#Benghazi: Looking Like A Middle East Fast and Furious Continue reading
Post Written by Liberty Speaks original can be found HERE The Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012 (HR 6156) was signed into law by Pres. Obama on Friday, December 14th of this year. The law is designed … Continue reading