A.P Dillon on Social Media
Got PayPal? Donate Today!
Donate Other Ways
LATEST LL1885 POSTS
- More About That Bill That Would Make Durham Public Schools A Landlord
- Durham Legislators File Bill To Let Durham Public Schools Become A Landlord
- Left-Leaning ‘Education Non-Profits’ Step Up Attacks On #SchoolChoice Kids, Families
- FL Governor’s EO ‘Removing’ Common Core Is A Nice Gesture
- ICYMI – Google Pumped 250K into SPLC’s Education Propaganda Arm
Get A.P. Dillon’s Updates and Weekly Email Blast
ARCHIVES BY CATEGORY
Tag Archives: Syria
Benghazi is still here, sorry Hillary fans. Looks like it does make a difference. That last month has had a number of revelations that have pulled back the some of the curtain that the Obama administration keeps trying to drop over this scandal. The most recent being that it indeed does make a difference that the Accountability Review Board (ARB) didn’t interview Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy.
Hot Air reports:
Remember when the ironically-named Accountability Review Board assigned blame for the Benghazi debacle on low-level employees at the State Department? When challenged by Congress as to why the ARB never interviewed Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy, ARB co-chair Thomas Pickering replied that they had already concluded that blame for the unprotected diplomatic facility rested below his level. Whistleblower Eric Nordstrom told Congress, however, that the decisions that left the consulate defenseless against the terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11 came from Kennedy’s level — at least.
A new report from Fox vindicates Nordstrom, although it might not be quite that new:
The decision to keep U.S. personnel in Benghazi with substandard security was made at the highest levels of the State Department by officials who have so far escaped blame over the Sept. 11 attack, according to a review of recent congressional testimony and internal State Department memos by Fox News.
Nine months before the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others, State Department Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy signed off on an internal memo that green-lighted the Benghazi operation.
Hot Air then reports the State Department yawned, said it was an old memo and old news. Really? More from Hot Air:
The question is whether Kennedy signed off on this himself, or did so under the direction of his superiors. The State Department told Fox that this memo was essentially old news:
Asked whether Kennedy signed off on State Department policy unilaterally, or whether he consulted senior leadership, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki downplayed the importance of the memo, stating Fox News’ policy question was dealt with during a hearing before the House oversight committee last fall.
“Let me just say on this particular memo, it’s been available to the House of Representatives since October. It was discussed in October in a hearing on the House side and in many, many, many briefings. It was even posted — this sensitive document was posted on the website as well,” Psaki said.
Asked whether Kennedy had the authorization to sign off on a continued presence, Psaki said Kennedy had spoken at length to the Accountability Review Board, adding “I don’t know that we have a new update today.”
Well, if that was the case, then why didn’t Pickering and his ARB start asking those questions of Kennedy? The core question for the ARB was determining the responsibility for the failures that allowed the outpost in Benghazi to be successfully sacked by terrorists, resulting in the deaths of four Americans. The action memo wasn’t just something passed around State and initialed by Kennedy as a pro forma act — it’s addressed directly to him requesting authorization to keep the facility open “through the end of calendar year 2012.”
Also, isn’t Psaki contradicting Pickering here? Didn’t Pickering say Kennedy wasn’t interviewed by ARB? Looks like Psaki can’t keep her lies straight. Either way, the fact remains that multiple levels at the State Department knew the security was substandard and yet no one did anything about it.
Other Benghazi Updates: 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