During Veterans’ Forum, Hillary Conveniently “Forgets” Benghazi and 4 Dead Americans

th85xg4ihkLast night, Democratic Party Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that American Lives lost as a result of her failed policies as Secretary of State truly do not “make a difference” to her.

The Washington Times reports that

Glossing over the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi that claimed the lives of four U.S. diplomats, Hillary Clinton on Wednesday night claimed that “we did not lose a single American” due to military intervention in Libya.

Speaking at a veterans’ forum hosted by NBC News, the former secretary of state said she stands by the 2011 decision to take action in Libya and that America suffered no casualties.

“When [former Libyan leader Moammar] Gadhafi was threatening to massacre his population, I put together a coalition that included NATO, included the Arab League, and we were able to save lives. We did not lose a single American in that action,” she said. “And I think taking action was the right decision. Not taking it and permitting there to be an ongoing civil war in Libya would’ve been as dangerous and threatening as what we are now seeing in Syria.” 

No Americans were lost in the military intervention itself, but the aftermath was a far different story. Four Americans were killed when the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was attacked by terrorists on Sept. 11, 2012, and Mrs. Clinton has come under intense fire for not taking greater security precautions for her diplomats.

Mrs. Clinton’s opponent in the 2016 presidential race, Republican Donald Trump, said the Obama administration badly mishandled the aftermath of the Libyan military intervention.

“They complicated the mistake, once they bombed the you-know-what out of Gadhafi. They made a terrible mistake on Libya,” he said at the NBC forum.

On September 11, 2012, Muslim Terrorists stormed the US Embassy Compound in Benghazi, Libya, slaughtered 4 brave Americans, including US Ambassador Chris Stephens, whose lifeless, sexually assaulted body they drug through the streets, while taking cell phone pictures of his corpse.

I have written several blogs about the Administration’s Cover-up of this atrocity, but the seminal moment, regarding Hillary Clinton, came in January of 2013, during an exchange between her and Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin at a Foreign Relations Committee hearing.

Johnson asked her about the administration’s conflicting explanations for the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, which killed the ambassador and three other Americans. Hillary, as we say down here in Dixie, “got on her high keys” and said,

With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.

Regardless of what the Democratic Presidential Candidate proclaimed in front of a sub-committee, what happened at a remote Embassy Compound in Libya DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

We have learned a lot of things since the Benghazi Massacre.

On October 27th, 2012, I reported that

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later on the annex itself was denied by the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators twice to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to “stand down.”

Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights.

CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood, [on orders from General Petraeus] though, denied the claims that requests for support were turned down.

“We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi,” she said. “Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night-and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades.”

That means that the order to stand down had to come from Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and/or President Barack Hussein Obama. [or Valerie Jarrett]

We also learned on October 26, 2012, that there were two drones circling overhead, as four brave Americans were being slaughtered. Obama and his Administration knew exactly what was happening, yet, for the sake of political expediency, chose to do nothing about it.

What Hillary’s appearance before the Benghazi Hearings showed, was a pathological predilection for dishonesty, insincerity, and inappropriateness, not only on the part of Former Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton,  but the whole Obama Administration, as well, from the top on down.

They all knew that the cause of the attacks was not some stupid Youtube Video, but a full-blown Muslim Terrorist Attack.

However, for the sake of Political Expediency…and the re-election of President Barack Hussein Obama and the legacy of his rapidly failing Foreign Policy, known as Smart Power!, they had to quickly come up with an excuse for their liability in the deaths of those four brave Americans.

The words “reckless handling” do not even begin to cover the callous, Machiavellian way that Hillary Clinton and her boss, President Barack Hussein Obama, left those Americans to die at the hands of Muslim Barbarians that fateful evening at the U.S. Embassy Compound in Benghazi, Libya, for the sake of political expediency.

So, why do the deaths of these four Americans “still matter” in the midst of Clinton’s 2016 Presidential Campaign?

As I finish writing today’s post, I my mind considers the possibility of Hillary Clinton becoming the Leader of the Free World, and a great many thoughts enter my head…some of them even repeatable.

I remember the image of a lone terrorist, brandishing a machine gun, standing in front of the burning Benghazi Consulate.

I also remember the image of Benghazi Barbarians dragging a murdered Ambassador Chris Stevens through the streets, taking pictures every few yards, with their cell phones.

My mind envisions the image of two brave Americans, up on a roof holding off 100 Muslim Terrorists, trying desperately to hold out for help which was denied to them, until finally the overwhelming numbers which comprised the horde of barbarians, murdered them as well.

I imagine Ambassador Stevens’ elderly mother, making the trip from the West Coast to the East Coast to pick up the lifeless body of her abused and murdered son, whom she and her entire family were so proud of.

Finally, I remember the show of hypocrisy involving members of this anti-American Administration solemnly welcoming the bodies of those brave Americans home.

Former Secretary Clinton…the truth makes a big difference…to the families of those that were so savagely murdered that fateful night…and to the millions of Americans who still believe in this “Shining City on a Hill”.

We average Americans know the truth, which is why the Main Stream Media is currently running an unprecedented offensive against Republican Candidate Donald J. Trump, while ignoring the fact that you are unfit for holding the Office of President of the United States of America.

In fact, given the fact that you left those Americans to die, you should be ashamed to be running for President of the United States of America.

But, of course, their deaths do not matter to you, because “it’s YOUR turn”.

Until He Comes, 

KJ

The Benghazi Hearings: American Families Still Wait For The Truth About Their Sons’ Sacrifice

benghaziwhitehouseIt’s been a little over three years since you lost your child. Yes, you know that they were an adult, but they were still your child…and you loved them very much.

Yes, it’s been a little over three years, but in some ways it seems like yesterday that you received that call. That call that no parent should have to hear. A call telling you that your child had been murdered…in the service of his country. Murdered by Radical Muslims, on the other side of the world.

When you asked those who are supposed to know, what happened to your child, they hemmed and hawed, saying that it had something to do with a video on the Internet, that you had never even heard of, much less seen.

Your beloved child, murdered because of some stupid video? That doesn’t even seen possible.

As time went on, you came under siege by reporters and government officials alike. The reporters wanted to interview you, so that their ratings would go up. The authorities, while not overtly threatening you, or anything like that, basically gave you the cold shoulder, keeping their little game of hide and seek with the facts of your child’s death going on, as if you were not entitled to a clear picture of what actually happened.

Don’t they understand what you’re still going through? You lost your child…your son. A son you nursed through all the ups and downs of growing up, who you proudly watched as he decided that he wanted to be of service to his country.

And still, nobody will tell you the truth of what happened to him.

After what seemed like an eternity, a congressman named Darrel Issa reached out to you. He told you that he was holding Congressional Hearings to get to the bottom of this whole disgraceful business. So, you make the trip to Washington, DC, and patiently wait your turn to testify before Issa and the Congressional Committee.

Finally, after all those months, there you were. You took the stand after they called your name. As you were about to tell your story, all the Democratic Representatives in the room, except for two, excused themselves from the meeting, imperiously above listening to a commoner, an American Parent, still grieving over the loss of their child, so savagely murdered, tell their story.

You watched them as they walked out…

Carolyn Maloney

Danny Davis

Eleanor Holmes Norton

Gerald E. Connolly

Jim Cooper

John Tierney

Mark Pocan

Matt Cartwright

Michelle Lujan Grisham

Peter Welch

Stephen Lynch

Steven Horsford

Tammy Duckworth

Tony Cardenas

William Lacy Clay

Two of them actually stayed to hear your story, Ranking Member Elijah Cummings and Rep. Jackie Speier.

And, now, after watching the one in charge of the Benghazi Embassy, Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, imperiously lie to the latest House Committee, under Trey Gowdy, you’re wondering if this reliving of your grief and anguish, was all worth it.

…as your grief becomes unbearable…again.

Foxnews.com has the story…

Michael Ingmire watched as Hillary Clinton was grilled for 11 hours Thursday about the 2012 attack in Benghazi that left his nephew and three other Americans dead and saw not a future president, but a “serial liar.”

As a congressional panel pressed the former Secretary of State over the attack on the consulate facility in the Libyan city, Ingmire, uncle of Sean Smith, and relatives of former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty watched from their homes, hoping Clinton’s testimony would yield answers about why additional security was not granted and why she initially blamed the attack on a YouTube video instead of a coordinated act of terrorism.

“The thing that was shocking – one of the pinnacle moments – was the revelation she told her family there was a terrorist attack while she told America something else,” Smith’s uncle, Michael Ingmire, told FoxNews.com. “Mrs. Clinton is a serial liar.”

Smith, an information officer, and Woods, a former Navy SEAL, died along with Doherty and U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens when Islamic militants stormed the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi and set it ablaze before attacking a nearby CIA compound with machine guns and rockets.

Stevens, the first U.S. Ambassador killed in the line of duty since 1979, had repeatedly asked the State Department for increased security at the consulate prior to the attack but his requests were not granted. 

In the hours following the attacks, the Obama administration learned they were carefully planned assaults by Al Qaeda-related militants but Clinton and others would go on to tell a different tale: an anti-Muslim YouTube video caused spontaneous protests and angry mobs were to blame for the attacks.

“So if there’s no evidence for a video-inspired protest, then where did the false narrative start?” Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan asked Clinton during the hearing Thursday.

“It started with you, Madam Secretary,” he said. “You could live with a protest about a video, that won’t hurt you, but a terror attack would.”

Clinton rejected Jordan’s claim, describing the situation in the hours after the attack as “fluid” and the details unclear.

“I am sorry that it doesn’t fit your narrative congressman, I can only tell you what the facts are,” Clinton said.

During the marathon hours of questioning — which Democrats claim was a partisan attack on the Democratic presidential frontrunner — Clinton said Stevens understood the risks involved and that his requests for additional security never crossed her desk.

“Those requests for security were rightly reviewed by the security professionals,” Clinton told the committee. “I did not see them. I did not approve them. I did not deny them.”

Clinton also described Stevens as a friend, saying the 52-year-old ambassador “understood that most people in Libya or anywhere reject the extremists’ argument that violence can ever be a path to dignity or justice.”

“I knew and admired Chris Stevens,” she said in her opening remarks Thursday. “He was one of our nation’s most accomplished diplomats. Chris’ mother liked to say he had ‘sand in his shoes,’ because he was always moving, always working, especially in the Middle East that he came to know so well.”

But Clinton’s closeness to Stevens was called into question by Rep Susan Brooks, R-Ill., who asked: “Did you ever personally speak to him after you swore him in in May? Yes or no please.”

“Yes, I believe I did,” Clinton replied. “I don’t recall.”

Ingmire described Clinton’s choice of words about Stevens as jarring. 

“How could she say ‘Chris thought this’ and ‘Chris felt that’ when she basically had nothing to do with him?” Ingmire said. 

Tyrone Woods’ father, Charles, recalled meeting Clinton when his son’s body arrived at Andrews Air Force Base two days after the attacks. 

“I gave Hillary a hug and shook her hand and she said, ‘We are going to have the filmmaker arrested who was responsible for the death of your son,” Woods said, reading the account from his journal. 

“That was a complete bald-faced lie,” he told FoxNews.com Friday. “The day after the attack, she was talking to the Prime Minister of Egypt and she said the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the video.” 

Smith’s mother, Patricia, gave a similar account, saying she was told by the administration “it was a video when they knew it was not a video.”

“They told me lies,” she said Friday. “My son told me the night before that he has been asking for security and he hasn’t heard anything.” 

Over three years later, the truth as to why the Obama Administration sacrificed the lives of those four Brave Americans, for the sake of political expediency, on that horrible night in Benghazi, is still not known. Americans have their suspicions. Suspicions that were not allayed any by the Cackling hen appearing before, thanks to her fellow Democrats, what turned into a Dog and Pony Showb, last Thursday on Capitol Hill.

Remember the oft-quoted speech by President Obama at the UN General Assembly, in which he proclaimed that

…The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam?

Since that night in Benghazi, the Radical Muslim-fueled violence know as “Arab Spring” has proceeded “right on schedule”, with SRussia and America now on the brink of a war, with Syrian’s Muslim President Assad now in its cross-hairs. 

President Obama has made speeches in support of and sent advanced weaponry to the “Syrian Rebels”, whose majority are card-carrying members of the Muslim Terrorist Group, al Qaeda, perpetrators of the largest Terrorist Attack ever on American Soil, on 9/11/01, and the attack on the Benghazi Compound.

Fortunately, Americans refused to support Obama’s mission to aid these Terrorists.

Our memories of those two faithful days, 11 years apart, and average Americans’ wish for justice for those 3,000 and 4 Americans, savagely murdered by the “followers of the prophet”, take precedence over any trumped-up concern over any slander of his name.

…and, Hillary Clinton’s Political Future.

There are American Families who deserve the truth.

Until Christ Comes,

KJ

The Benghazi Hearings: E-mails Prove Clinton LIED As To How Four Brave Americans DIED.

Laughing-H-600-LIYesterday, Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, appeared before the House Select Committee on Benghazi, chaired by the inestimable Trey Gowdy.

Yesterday morning, Hillary’s duplicitous nature was clearly revealed, for all the world to see.

Liar, liar. Pants suit on fire.

Breitbart.com reports that

Hillary Clinton sent an email to her daughter, Chelsea, on Sept. 11, 2012 in which she asserted that an al-Qaida-like group was responsible for the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, it was revealed on Thursday during the former secretary of state’s testimony to the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

The email, which was revealed by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, indicates that Clinton knew early on that the attacks which left four Americans dead was carried out by terrorists. But as Jordan pointed out, Clinton and others in the Obama administration had already begun crafting the narrative that the attack was spontaneous and that the attackers were motivated by a YouTube video many Muslims found offensive.

In the email cited by Jordan, Clinton responded to daughter Chelsea, who emailed under the pseudonym Diane Reynolds.

“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like [sic] group,” Clinton wrote.

But shortly before the email, after it was revealed that Ambassador Chris Stevens had been murdered in the onslaught, Clinton implied that the YouTube video had served as a motive.

“Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted to the Internet,” Clinton said in a statement shortly after Stevens’ death.

The Obama administration continued for days after the attack to claim that the YouTube video — entitled “Innocence of Muslims” — had sparked protests which turned violent. Critics of the administration’s handling of the response to the attack assert that the YouTube video was used as political cover to protect Obama ahead of his re-election bid. Obama had been on the campaign trail insisting that he had destroyed al-Qaida.

Jordan compared Clinton’s disparate positions, asserting that she “knew the truth” but insisted on casting some blame on the video.

“You tell the American people one thing, you tell your family an entirely different story,” Jordan said.

He also cited a call Clinton made the night of the attack to Mohammed Magariaf, who was then the president of Libya. According to a transcript of the call, Clinton acknowledged that the al-Qaida affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia was “claiming responsibility” for the attack.

And in a phone call with Egyptian Prime Minister Hisham Kandil the next day, Clinton said “we know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack, not a protest.”

The administration’s claim that the YouTube video played a part in the Benghazi attack reached its pinnacle on Sept. 16, 2012, when then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice asserted as much on several Sunday morning talk shows.

And emails show that Clinton’s aides at the State Department showed no disagreement with Rice’s statements, in which she called the video “very offensive.”

Clinton’s State Department aide, Jake Sullivan, sent his boss an email that same day indicating that Rice’s comments were in line with Clinton’s views.

“She did make clear our view that this started spontaneously and then evolved,” Sullivan wrote.

He backtracked off of that position the next week, however. In a Sept. 24, 2012 email, he assured Clinton: “You never said spontaneous or characterized the motives.”

“State Department experts knew the truth, you knew the truth, but that’s not what the American people got,” Jordan said Thursday, during his tense exchange with Clinton.

“There was a lot of conflicting information that we were trying to make sense of,” Clinton said, defending her conflicting positions.

That did not stop the lie from growing…exponentially.

On September 25, 2012, United States President, Barack Hussein Obama , spoke before the United Nations General Assembly, blaming that same un-watched youtube.com video, for the massacre of 4 brave Americans, on the night of September 11, 2012, at the Benghazi , Libya, U.S. Embassy Compound,

…In every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they’re willing to tolerate freedom for others. And that is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, where a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well.

For as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion, we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe.

We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them. I know there are some who ask why don’t we just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws. Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.

Let’s spring forward a little bit to the 2012 Vice-Presidential Debate, where the folllowing statements were made by the one, the only Jar Jar Biden:

MS. RADDATZ: What were you first told about the attack? Why were people talking about protests? When people in the consulate first saw armed men attacking with guns, there were no protesters. Why did that go on for weeks?

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Because that’s exactly what we were told —

MS. RADDATZ: By who?

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: — by the intelligence community. The intelligence community told us that. As they learned more facts about exactly what happened, they changed their assessment. That’s why there’s also an investigation headed by Tom Pickering, a leading diplomat in the — from the Reagan years, who is doing an investigation as to whether or not there were any lapses, what the lapses were, so that they will never happen again. But —

MS. RADDATZ: And they wanted more security there.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, we weren’t told they wanted more security again. We did not know they wanted more security again. And by the way, at the time we were told exactly — we said exactly what the intelligence community told us that they knew. That was the assessment. And as the intelligence community changed their view, we made it clear they changed their view. That’s why I said, we will get to the bottom of this.

Biden lied, too.

What the Benghazi Hearings showed yesterday, was a pathological predilection for dishonesty, insincerity, and inappropriateness, not only on the part of Former Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton,  but the whole Obama Administration, as well, from the top on down.

They all knew that the cause of the attacks was not some stupid Youtube Video, but a full-blown Muslim Terrorist Attack.

However, for the sake of Political Expediency…and the re-election of President Barack Hussein Obama and the legacy of his rapidly-failing Foreign Policy, known as Smart Power!, they had to quickly come up with an excuse for their liability in the deaths of those four brave Americans.

And now, Hillary Rodham Clinton, with her Oscar-worthy Performance in front of the House Committee yesterday, which including circuitous answers to Yes or No Questions and inappropriate smirks, accompanied by cackling laughter, has proven completely true and accurate as to what I and my fellow Conservative Americans have said about her all along:

She is a sociopath, who envisions herself to be smarter than everybody else, above the law, and White House-bound, because, “it’s her turn”.

The only place that she should be bound, at least in this life, is jail.

Her final destination promises to be a more Southern Locale…and infinitely hotter.

Until He Comes,

KJ

21 Egyptian Coptic Christians Beheaded By ISIS While Obama Golfs

AFBrancoObamaISIS922014Despite the Liberal-lauded “Coalition” Bombing Campaign, being orchestrated by the Obama White House, the Muslim Terrorist Organization, known as ISIS, continues their slaughter of the innocent, unabated.

Breitbart.com reports that

The Islamic State terror group released a video on Sunday showing the Islamic jihadis beheading 21 Egyptian Christians who were previously kidnapped in Libya.

The Egyptian Copts, who were dressed in prisoner-like orange jump suits, were lined up along a beach and abruptly beheaded in the graphic five-minute video.

The Islamic State’s Al Hayat Media, the group that has published the previous beheading videos in the Middle East, produced the Libya video titled, “A Message Signed With Blood To The Nation Of The Cross.”

“All praise is due to Allah the strong and mighty,” said an ISIS jihadist dressed in military fatigues in American-accented English. “And may blessings and peace be upon the ones sent by the sword as a mercy to all the worlds,” he added.

The masked ISIS member continues:

Oh people, recently you have seen us on the hills of Al-Sham and Dabiq’s plain, chopping off the heads that have been carrying the cross for a long time, and today, we are on the south of Rome, on the land of Islam, Libya, sending another message.

All crusaders: safety for you will be only wishes especially if you are fighting us all together. Therefore we will fight you all together. The sea you have hidden Sheikh Osama bin Laden’s body in, we swear to Allah we will mix it with your blood.

After the ISIS leader finishes speaking, his fellow terrorists then commence the beheading of the 21 Egyptian Christians. “And we will conquer Rome, by Allah’s permission, the promise of our Prophet, peace be upon him,” The militant leader says after his comrades slaughter the Christian hostages.

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi immediately brought in his national defense council after being notified about the brutal murder of the twenty-one Egyptians. “It is with deep sorrow that President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi mourns the Egyptian victims of an abhorrent act of terrorism in Libya and offers his deepest condolences to the Egyptian people for their grave loss,” said a statement from the Egyptian president’s office.

Libya has largely fallen into a state of civil war and complete lawlessness following the U.S.-led effort that ultimately deposed its late autocrat Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. Islamist militias, some of which have pledged allegiance to the Islamic State, have been fighting fierce battles against the forces of secular, anti-Islamist Libyan General Khalifa Haftar.

In response, Rev. Franklin Graham posted on his Facebook Page that

The militant Islamic terrorist group ISIS has released a video called A MESSAGE SIGNED WITH BLOOD TO THE NATION OF THE CROSS showing the beheadings of 21 Egyptian Christians who had been kidnapped in Libya. Can you imagine the outcry if 21 Muslims had been beheaded by Christians? Where is the universal condemnation by Muslim leaders around the world? As we mourn with the families of those 21 martyrs, we’d better take this warning seriously as these acts of terror will only spread throughout Europe and the United States. If this concerns you like it does me, share this. The storm is coming.

Where, indeed? The Obama White House condemned the mass slaughter…sort of

Todd Starnes of Fox News notes that

It was another weekend of bloodletting by the radical followers of Mohammed. By now you’ve seen the images – 21 Coptic Christians – slaughtered on a Libyan beach by radical Islamic extremists.

The White House denounced what they called the “murder of Egyptian Citizens” — not Christians — citizens. The president could not even summon the moral courage to speak the truth.

They’re called Christians, sir. And their heads were savagely torn from their necks by monstrous Islamic jihadists.

And, the “Leader of the Free World” “ain’t doin’ squat” about it.

Are you old enough to remember when we had an actual American President?

I sure am.

We all remember the first time we went into a voting booth and got to pull the lever for the candidate of our choice.

I was especially blessed as a 22 year old college senior. My very first vote, in any sort of election, was when I got to pull the lever for Ronald Wilson Reagan.

In 1974, at the very first Conservative Political Action Conference, the future President of the United States said the following:

Somehow America has bred a kindliness into our people unmatched anywhere, as has been pointed out in that best-selling record by a Canadian journalist. We are not a sick society. A sick society could not produce the men that set foot on the moon, or who are now circling the earth above us in the Skylab. A sick society bereft of morality and courage did not produce the men who went through those years of torture and captivity in Vietnam. Where did we find such men? They are typical of this land as the Founding Fathers were typical. We found them in our streets, in the offices, the shops and the working places of our country and on the farms.

We cannot escape our destiny, nor should we try to do so. The leadership of the free world was thrust upon us two centuries ago in that little hall of Philadelphia. In the days following World War II, when the economic strength and power of America was all that stood between the world and the return to the dark ages, Pope Pius XII said, “The American people have a great genius for splendid and unselfish actions. Into the hands of America God has placed the destinies of an afflicted mankind.

We are indeed, and we are today, the last best hope of man on earth.

And when Reagan became president, he did everything within his power to uphold these lofty words.

I suppose that is why I hold Barack Hussein Obama in such disdain. As a young man just starting my new life in the business world, I was able to watch the economy start to turn around under the greatest president in our lifetime. There was a confidence in our strength as an American people that I had never seen before.

You could see it in people’s faces as you walked past them on the street… or at the gas station, as we all watched the price of a gallon of gas finally go down after the pain at the pump that we experienced during the Carter Presidency.

People who had been out of work and suffering along with their families were beginning to be hired again. And, young Americans who had no confidence in the previous commander in chief, were once again going to military recruiters asking to sign up to serve our country.

Yes, indeed. Once again, it was “Morning in America”.

However, the popularity of our president was not just limited to the boundaries of our nation. Reagan was admired the world over. The things that he accomplished, along with his friends, Prime Minister of Britain Margaret Thatcher, Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev, and Pope John Paul II, have caused the decade of the 1980s to be recorded as a seminal moment in world history.

I remember watching President Reagan speak at the Berlin Wall. When he said, “Mr Gorbachev tear down this wall!”, I was never prouder to be an American and of an American president, than at that moment.

The Liberal Democrats lost their collective minds.

For you see, Liberal Democrats, just as they do now, hate it when America wins.

Nothing bothers them more than when a strong American President is at the forefront of a conquering moment, when a strong foreign policy based on the reality that negotiating from a position of strength is always more effective than negotiating from a position of weakness.

Fast forward to the present, where an ineffective President Barack Hussein Obama is looking like a fool to a world who used to look to America as a bastion of strength and freedom, not weakness and political expediencies.

President Barack Hussein Obama has placed us in an untenable position with his weak and vacillating Smart Power Foreign Policy, resulting in a “war by remote control” against a Nomadic group of Islamic Barbarians, known as ISIS.

As you can see with all of these horrible videos, showing the heinous murders of innocent people, those who used to cringe in their desert tents, while calling us the Great Satan, now laugh in our faces, while they kill innocent men, women and children with impunity.

Eventually, Obama will probably invite them to the White House and meet with them, as he has the Muslim Brotherhood, to “negotiate”.

For you see, the man who is supposed to protect America, which he announced several years ago, is no longer “just” a Christian Nation, cares more for the political ideology, masked as a religion, followed by those whom he used to attend a madrassa with in Jakarta, than he does the faith of those of us who attend a Christian American Church every Sunday Morning.

And, that’s why, when those 21 Coptic Christians from Egypt were being slaughtered, Obama was playing a round of golf.

Actions speak louder than words.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Another American Journo Beheaded. 11 Planes Missing From Tripoli Airport. President Pantywaist Piddles.

AFBrancoObamaISIS922014Another American Journalist has lost his life to the group of subhuman troglodytes known as ISIS.

The Daily Mail reports that

ISIS has released a video that shows the beheading of U.S. journalist Steven Sotloff and says the murder is retaliation for the Obama administration’s continued airstrikes in Iraq.

Sotloff is the second American journalist to be killed by ISIS, and his death comes two weeks after James Foley was executed in a similar video.

In the video entitled ‘A Second Message to America,’ Sotloff appears in a orange jumpsuit before he is beheaded by an Islamic State fighter.

The executioner appears to be the same man who killed Foley – known as ‘Jihadi John’ – and tells the camera: ‘I’m back, Obama, and I’m back because of your arrogant foreign policy towards the Islamic State.

Another American losing his life to these bloodthirsty creatures is horrible enough. However, can you imagine what ISIS could do with 11 Airplanes?

The Washington Free Beacon reports that

Islamist militias in Libya took control of nearly a dozen commercial jetliners last month, and western intelligence agencies recently issued a warning that the jets could be used in terrorist attacks across North Africa.

Intelligence reports of the stolen jetliners were distributed within the U.S. government over the past two weeks and included a warning that one or more of the aircraft could be used in an attack later this month on the date marking the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against New York and Washington, said U.S. officials familiar with the reports.

“There are a number of commercial airliners in Libya that are missing,” said one official. “We found out on September 11 what can happen with hijacked planes.”

The official said the aircraft are a serious counterterrorism concern because reports of terrorist control over the Libyan airliners come three weeks before the 13th anniversary of 9/11 attacks and the second anniversary of the Libyan terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi.

Four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed in the Benghazi attack, which the Obama administration initially said was the result of a spontaneous demonstration against an anti-Muslim video.

A senior State Department counterterrorism official declined to comment on reports of the stolen jetliners.

 A second State department official sought to downplay the reports. “We can’t confirm that,” he said.

Meanwhile, officials said Egyptian military forces appear to be preparing to intervene in Libya to prevent the country from becoming a failed state run by terrorists, many with ties to al Qaeda.

Libya remains an oil-rich state and if the country is taken over completely by Islamist extremists, U.S. counterterrorism officials believe it will become another terrorist safe haven in the region.

No problem, boys and girls. President Pantywaist is going to do something to get these Muslim Barbarians’ full attention. Err…umm…maybe not.

Fox News reports that

President Obama announced Tuesday he is sending approximately 350 additional military personnel to Iraq to protect U.S. diplomatic facilities and workers in Baghdad.

The White House said in a press release that the personnel will not serve a combat role, and are fulfilling a request from the State Department for more protection as the country fights an insurgency from the Islamic State militant group, also known as ISIS or ISIL.

When Barack Obama, Jr. was 3-years-old, his parents divorced.  Obama only saw his father one time after that.  Dad moved to Kenya and his mother married an Indonesian man, Lolo Soetoro.  From ages six to 10, young Barack attended a private school for well-off families in the Muslim-populated city of Jakarta.

On February 27th,2007, speaking to Nicholas Kristof of  The New York Times, in an interview since deleted from their archives, Barack Hussein Obama said the Muslim call to prayer is “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”

In fact, Obama recited the Muslim call to prayer, the Adhan, “with a first-class [Arabic] accent.”
The opening lines of the Adhan (Azaan) is the Shahada:

“Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme!
Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme!
I witness that there is no god but Allah
I witness that there is no god but Allah
I witness that Muhammad is his prophet? “

According to Islamic scholars, reciting the Shahada, the Muslim declaration of faith, makes one a Muslim. This statement expresses a Muslim’s complete acceptance of, and total commitment to, the message of Islam. Obama chanted it with pride and finesse. 

Through his background, as carefully hidden as it is, and his words and actions since becoming Leader of the (for now) Free World, Obama has revealed himself. Some questions still remain: How much did the Democratic Party know about this man and when did they know it? The same goes for the sycophantic Main Stream Media. They were all complicit in bringing this miserable excuse for a President of the United States to power.

In fact, with the Muslim Barbarians literally at the gates, the word is out that some of his supporters, such as Diane Feinstein, are finally starting to understand that the “clothes have no Emperor”.

Will America survive? Yes, we will. The mid-terms are upon us and Obama’s lame duck status will not improve. He is too much of an idealogue to turn Moderate like Bill Clinton did. He is marooned on an island of his own design. The key for Americans is to continue to be vocal in our opposition to his schemes for “radically changing” our blessed land and his lack of a strategy for dealing with his “Muslim Brothers”.

Let your elected representatives know that the nefarious schemes and backroom deals of the Obama Administration does not sit well with the overwhelming majority of Americans. Also, let them know that they will not keep their cushy job this November if they vote in favor of any of his plans seemingly designed, whether out or ignorance or malice, to bring America to its knees, and, they keep their mouths shut about the threat to our country from ISIS and the rest of the Radical Muslim Barbarians.

Oh, and please, believers…keep prayed up.

Until He Comes,

KJ

President Pantywaist to ISIS: “Stop!” or I’ll Say “Stop!” Again! ”Fore!”

ObamaISIS8212014The President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama, said the following about the Radical Islamic Terrorist Organization, ISIS, in a interview with The New Yorker Magazine, published on January 27th of this year:

The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a JV team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant. I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.

I wonder if ol’ Scooter is having second thoughts about his under-estimation, because, according to his Secretary of Defense, Obama’s ignorant analysis missed by a country mile.

Reuters.com has the story

The sophistication, wealth and military might of Islamic State militants represent a major threat to the United States that may surpass that once posed by al Qaeda, U.S. military leaders said on Thursday.

“They are an imminent threat to every interest we have, whether it’s in Iraq or anywhere else,” Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told reporters at the Pentagon.

Hagel’s assessment of Islamic State, which gained strength during Syria’s civil war and swept into northern Iraq earlier this summer, sounded a note of alarm several days after the group posted a video on social media showing one of its fighters beheading an American hostage kidnapped in Syria.

Asked if the hardline Sunni Muslim organization posed a threat to the United States comparable to that of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Hagel said it was “as sophisticated and well-funded as any group we have seen.”

“They are beyond just a terrorist group. They marry ideology, a sophistication of … military prowess. They are tremendously well-funded. This is beyond anything we’ve seen.”

Hagel spoke as the United States continued attacking Islamic State targets in Iraq. In the past two weeks, U.S. drones and fighter jets have conducted 89 airstrikes against militant targets in northern Iraq.

So far, President Barack Obama has sought to limit his renewed military campaign in Iraq to protecting American diplomats and civilians under direct threat. Obama ended the war in Iraq that killed thousands of American soldiers and consumed U.S. foreign policy for nearly a decade,

Even after the gruesome killing of U.S. journalist James Foley, Obama is seen as unlikely to deepen his near-term military involvement in either Iraq or Syria as he seeks to avoid becoming embroiled in another messy Middle Eastern conflict.

But U.S. officials say they have not ruled out escalating military action against Islamic State, which has increased its overt threats against the United States since the air campaign in Iraq began.

“We haven’t made a decision to take additional actions at this time, but we truly don’t rule out additional action against ISIL if it becomes warranted,” Ben Rhodes, a senior Obama aide, told National Public Radio earlier on Thursday, using another name for Islamic State.

General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said officials were worried about the possibility that European or U.S. nationals, radicalized after fighting in Iraq or Syria, would return to their home countries.

Dempsey suggested Islamic State would remain a danger until it could no longer count on safe havens in areas of Syria under militant control.

“This is an organization that has an apocalyptic, end-of- days strategic vision and which will eventually have to be defeated,” Dempsey said.

“To your question, can they be defeated without addressing that part of their organization which resides in Syria? The answer is no. That will have to be addressed on both sides of what is essentially at this point a non-existent border.”

So, they are big, bad, financed, and capable. But, why should we worry? It’s not like they have any Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Ummm…that would be a negatory, Good Buddy.

On June 19, 2014, the Wall Street Journal reported:

Sunni extremists in Iraq have occupied what was once Saddam Hussein’s premier chemical-weapons production facility, a complex that still contains a stockpile of old weapons, State Department and other U.S. government officials said.

U.S. officials don’t believe the Sunni militants will be able to create a functional chemical weapon from the material. The weapons stockpiled at the Al Muthanna complex are old, contaminated and hard to move, officials said.

Nonetheless, the capture of the chemical-weapon stockpile by the forces of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, known as ISIS or ISIL, the militant group that is seizing territory in the country, has grabbed the attention of the U.S.

“We remain concerned about the seizure of any military site by the ISIL,” Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, said in a written statement. “We do not believe that the complex contains CW materials of military value and it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to safely move the materials.” …

The Muthanna complex is near Lake Tharthar, roughly 45 miles northwest of Baghdad, an area now firmly in control of the Sunni rebels. ISIS has taken control of most of Anbar province as well as Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city.

Military officials said the U.S. was well aware of the Muthanna stockpile and wouldn’t have left it there if it posed a military threat. Still, when the U.S. pulled out of Iraq, it didn’t anticipate a large swath of the country, including numerous military bases, would be overrun by radical Sunni militants. One defense official said that if the U.S. had known the Iraqi government would lose control so soon, it might not have left the old chemical weapons in place.

In December of 1985, five U.S. citizens were murdered in simultaneous Islamic terrorist attacks at the Rome and Vienna airports. Upon finding out that Libyan Despot Muammar al-Qaddafi was behind the attacks, U.S. President Ronald Reagan ordered expanded sanctions against Libya and froze Libyan assets in the United States. On March 24, 1986, U.S. and Libyan forces clashed in the Gulf of Sidra, and four Libyan attack boats were sunk. Then, on April 5, terrorists bombed a West Berlin dance hall known to be frequented by U.S. servicemen. One U.S. serviceman and a Turkish woman were killed, and more than 200 people were wounded, including 50 other U.S. servicemen. U.S. intelligence actually intercepted radio messages sent from Libya to its diplomats in East Berlin ordering the April 5 attack on the LaBelle discotheque.

On April 14, 1986, President Reagan ordered air strikes against Libya in retaliation for their sponsorship of terrorism against American troops and citizens. The raid, which began shortly before 7 p.m. EST (2 a.m., April 15 in Libya), involved more than 100 U.S. Air Force and Navy aircraft, and was over within an hour. Five military targets and “terrorism centers” were hit, including the headquarters of Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi.

In fact, the rumor was, we fired a Stinger Missile right into Qaddafi’s bedroom.

After this, Qaddafi left us alone and kept his mouth shut for 25 years. All it took to make the sponsor of Muslim Terrorism back down was a show of strength and a United States President who was not afraid to use our military might in defense of our country.

Fast forward to today…

American Journalist Tim Foley is beheaded by ISIS, on a video which has now been seen around the world.

Obama delivers a 5-minute sternly-worded speech and leaves to go play golf.

Way to go, President Pantywaist. That showed ’em.

God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

BenghaziGate: Pelosi Continues to Deny Reality as the Democrat Distraction Campaign Continues

BenghaziWhiteHouseMind if I ask you a question?

How many squirrels are there in the White House backyard?

The reason I asked that question is because it seems that every time that the President and his Administration gets in trouble, they point out another squirrel for us to concentrate on.

Now that it has been decided that there will be a House Select Committee appointed, with Trey Howdy as its chairman, to investigate that horrible night of September 11th, 2012, when 4 Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, were slaughtered at the hands of al Qaeda operatives, on the grounds of the US Embassy Compound in Benghazi, Libya, the Administration and all of their minions, including the Main Stream Media, are trying their best to focus the country’s attention in another direction. This time the direction is Nigeria, where almost 250 young girls have been kidnapped by the al Qaeda operatives there.

The Administration’s efforts include having a picture of First Lady Michelle Obama holding up a sign of the Diplomatic Room of the White House featuring  the Twitter hashtag du jour, #BringBackOurGirls.

As I wrote earlier in the week, the President has sent military consultants over there in an effort to help find the young ladies, and to divert the low information voter’s attention away from the Benghazi Massacre.

Meanwhile, back on the homefront, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi talked to reporters yesterday, after the House Democrat held a meeting, trying to decide whether to be a part of the Committee or not. She told the reporters that the formation of a select committee was simply a distraction from her fallen messiah’s master plan to raise the dead and cure athlete’s Foot.

Well…that’s not exactly what she said, but what she did say was just as goofy.

The Washington Examiner reports that

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi says a new Republican-led panel to investigate the Benghazi attacks is just political stunt that doesn’t concern most Americans.

“Either people have gotten tired of Benghazi or they never knew about it in the first place,” the California Democrat told reporters Friday at the Capitol. “It’s all subterfuge because they don’t want to talk about what our responsibilities are here” in Congress.

The GOP-run House on Thursday rammed through a measure to establish a 12-member select committee to probe the attacks. The panel was set up to include seven Republicans and five Democrats, though Pelosi says that — for now — Democrats won’t participate.

Sign Up for the Politics Today newsletter!
“Let’s not be accomplices to this diversionary tactic,” she said.

Pelosi added that the Republicans’ push for a new Benghazi panel was the result of GOP Rep. Darrell Issa’s failure to lead his own probe of the attacks.

Five House committees have been investigating the attacks, most notably the Oversight and Government Reform Committee led by Issa, R-Calif.

But Pelosi said Republican leaders have been so displeased with Issa’s efforts they decided to “move from him to another venue.”

“Issa just is damaged goods,” she said. “We’ve been there, done this, over and over again.”

Issa has been highly critical of the Obama administration’s response to the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. The White House initially said the attacks were spontaneous and linked to protests earlier that day in Cairo against an American-made video denigrating Islam’s prophet Muhammad. But Republicans have said the evidence shows that the administration knew it was a planned attack by an organized anti-American terrorist group.

The Looney Lib-ette, while saying that “the American People are tired of it”, also said that “they never knew about it in the first place”.

I tried to figure that one out, but it gave me a headache.

Fox News Poll of 1,006 registered U.S. voters released in February, showed that

Overall, 66 percent of the respondents want the investigation t continue. And more specifically, 83 percent of Republicans, 50 percent of Democrats and 68 percent of independents agree — along with 92 percent of tea partyers, 78 percent of conservatives, 47 percent of liberals, 58 percent of blacks, 67 percent of whites, 68 percent of women and 63 percent of men.

For all of the Administration’s and their minions’ subterfuge and attempts at distraction, the fact remains that, on September 25, 2012, United States President, Barack Hussein Obama, spoke before the United Nations General Assembly, blaming an un-watched youtube.com video, for the massacre of 4 brave Americans, on the night of September 11, 2011, at the Benghazi , Libya, U.S. Embassy Compound, by al Qaeda Operatives…

…In every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they’re willing to tolerate freedom for others. And that is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, where a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well.

For as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion, we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe.

We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them. I know there are some who ask why don’t we just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws. Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.

Over a year and one-half later, the truth as to who issued the Stand Down Order, and sacrificed the lives of those 4 men, for the sake of political expediency, on that horrible night in Benghazi, is still not known. Americans have their suspicions. Suspicions that were not allayed any by the before-quoted speech by President Obama at the UN General Assembly, in which he proclaimed that

…The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

Since that night in Benghazi, the Radical Muslim-fueled violence know as “Arab Spring” has proceeded “right on schedule”, with Syrian’s Muslim President Assad now in its cross-hairs. 

President Obama has made speeches in support of and sent advanced weaponry to the “Syrian Rebels”, whose majority are card-carrying members of the Muslim Terrorist Group, al Qaeda, perpetrators of the largest Terrorist Attack ever on American Soil, on 9/11/01, and the attack on the Benghazi Compound.

Fortunately, Americans refuse to support Obama’s mission to aid these Terrorists.

Our memories of those two faithful days, 11 years apart, and average Americans’ wish for justice for those 3,000 and 4 Americans, savagely murdered by the “followers of the prophet”, take precedence over any trumped-up concern by President Barack Hussein Obama over any slander of “Muhammed’s name”. 

Americans want the truth.

Obama and his followers can’t handle the truth.

Until Christ Comes,

KJ

“Arab Spring” in August…”Smart Power”, Indeed.

obamabowIn December of 1985, five U.S. citizens were murdered in simultaneous Islamic terrorist attacks at the Rome and Vienna airports. Upon finding out that Libyan Despot Muammar al-Qaddafi was behind the attacks, U.S. President Ronald Reagan ordered expanded sanctions against Libya and froze Libyan assets in the United States. On March 24, 1986, U.S. and Libyan forces clashed in the Gulf of Sidra, and four Libyan attack boats were sunk. Then, on April 5, terrorists bombed a West Berlin dance hall known to be frequented by U.S. servicemen. One U.S. serviceman and a Turkish woman were killed, and more than 200 people were wounded, including 50 other U.S. servicemen. U.S. intelligence actually intercepted radio messages sent from Libya to its diplomats in East Berlin ordering the April 5 attack on the LaBelle discotheque.

On April 14, 1986, President Reagan ordered air strikes against Libya in retaliation for their sponsorship of terrorism against American troops and citizens. The raid, which began shortly before 7 p.m. EST (2 a.m., April 15 in Libya), involved more than 100 U.S. Air Force and Navy aircraft, and was over within an hour. Five military targets and “terrorism centers” were hit, including the headquarters of Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi.

In fact, the rumor was, we fired a Stinger Missile right into Qaddafi’s bedroom.

After this, Qaddafi left us alone and kept his mouth shut for 25 years. All it took to make the sponsor of Muslim Terrorism to back down was a show of strength and a United States President who was not afraid to use our military might in defense of our country.

Fast forward to today…

In the midst of new revelations about the horrible night of September 11, 2012 at the U.S. Embassy Compound in Benghazi, Libya, Obama and his Administration announced yesterday that

The United States will temporarily shut down its embassies and consulates around the world Sunday — including those in Iraq, Afghanistan and Egypt — as a precautionary measure over terror-related concerns, State Department officials said.

State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf did not say how long the international installations would stay closed — only that the decision was taken “out of an abundance of caution and care for our employees and others who may be visiting.” Officials would not describe the nature of the threat.

Sunday is a normal workday in many Arab and Middle Eastern countries, meaning that is where the closures will have an impact. Embassies in Europe and Latin America would be shuttered that day anyway.

“We have instructed all U.S. embassies and consulates that would have normally been open on Sunday to suspend operations, specifically on August 4,” a senior State Department official said Thursday night. “It is possible we may have additional days of closing as well.”

Daily politics news delivered to your inbox: sign up for our newsletter

Other U.S. officials said the threat was specifically in the Muslim world.

Additionally…

The Department of State alerts U.S. citizens to the continued potential for terrorist attacks, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa, and possibly occurring in or emanating from the Arabian Peninsula. Current information suggests that al-Qa’ida and affiliated organizations continue to plan terrorist attacks both in the region and beyond, and that they may focus efforts to conduct attacks in the period between now and the end of August. This Travel Alert expires on August 31, 2013.

Terrorists may elect to use a variety of means and weapons and target both official and private interests. U.S. citizens are reminded of the potential for terrorists to attack public transportation systems and other tourist infrastructure. Terrorists have targeted and attacked subway and rail systems, as well as aviation and maritime services. U.S. citizens should take every precaution to be aware of their surroundings and to adopt appropriate safety measures to protect themselves when traveling.

We continue to work closely with other nations on the threat from international terrorism, including from al-Qa’ida. Information is routinely shared between the U.S. and our key partners in order to disrupt terrorist plotting, identify and take action against potential operatives, and strengthen our defenses against potential threats.

Funny…after the Benghazi attack, Obama, is a series of Campaign Speeches, said at least 32 times, that al Qa’ida was “decimated”. Gosh, a U.S. president wouldn’t lie to the American people just to get re-elected, would he?

Does it take Moochelle two trips to haul…well…you know?

Instead of a show of strength against the murderous barbarians who want to kill us Infidels, Obama has embraced them, stating that he will stand with the Muslims “should the winds blow in an ugly direction”.

Courtesy of theblaze.com and the Investigative Project on Terrorism, here are some of the “guests” who Obama and his Administration have welcomed into OUR House:

  • Hussam Ayloush, Executive Director of CAIR’s Los Angeles Office: Has called Israel’s treatment of Palestinians “borderline genocidal,” and says Romney has “blind servitude” to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. He attended two White House meetings.
  • Louay Safi, Former Executive Director of the Islamic Society of North America: Worked at Fort Hood prior to the 2009 terrorist attack, and was suspended shortly thereafter. Said we must be “sympathetic” to those “fighting for freedom” in Palestine, and that we must be “against the occupiers and the oppressors.” He attended two White House meetings.
  • Esam Omeish, former head of the Muslim-American Society: Former head of an organization created by the Muslim Brotherhood, Omeish is one of the most radical in the group. The IPT writes that he personally hired radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki in 2000 to head a Virginia mosque, and publicly mourned an airstrike that killed one of the founders of Hamas in 2004. He has visited the White House three times.
  • Muzammil Siddiqi, former head of the Islamic Society of North America: ​Said in a 2001 article for the San Francisco Chronicle that he does not support violence against gays, but supports laws in countries where homosexuality is punishable by death. Siddiqi had one meeting at the White House in 2010.
  • Mohamed Elibiary, Homeland Security Council: Spoke at a conference in 2004 honoring Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeni as a “great Islamic visionary;” condemned the prosecution of Hamas fundraisers in the United States; defends Sayyid Qutb, who Osama bin Laden cited as one of his main influences; accused of leaking documents to prove Islamophobia, and damage Texas Gov. Rick Perry. Invited to help craft Obama’s counterterrorism strategy in 2010.
  • ​Muslim Public Affairs Council Leaders: ​Representatives from the Muslim Public Affairs Council have visited the White House far more than the other groups, at least one of its leaders logging 24 visits between December 2009 and March 2012. They said Hezbollah’s 1983 attack on U.S. Marine Barracks– which killed 241 people– was not “in a strict sense, a terrorist operation,” and that it would have been praised had it been directed against Washington’s enemies. Founder Salam al-Marayati said in 2005 that “Counter-terrorism and counter-violence should be defined by us.” Often push the narrative that the U.S. is waging a war on Islam, conflating legitimate terrorism concerns with Islamophobia. President Obama personally called one of the organization’s leaders, Haris Tarin, to congratulate him for his “community engagement.”

Under his failed Foreign Policy of Smart Power!, Obama has put the entire Free World, including the country he swore to protect from “enemies foreign and domestic” in danger from barbarians, who will do and say anything to further their “Holy Jihad”.

President Theodore Roosevelt’s famous quote, when speaking about how to deal with your enemies, was

Speak softly and carry a big stick.

Obama has thrown our “Big Stick” upon the fires of Arab Spring.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Bosnia…Libya…Syria

clintoncartoonIn the late 1990s, President Bill “Bubba” Clinton got our country involved in another nation’s civil war.

On August 15, 1996, Ted Galen Carpenter, Vice-President for Defense and Foreign Policy Studies at the Cato Institute and the author of Beyond NATO: Staying Out of Europe’s Wars. wrote a Foreign Policy Brief titled “The Domino Theory Reborn:  Clinton’s Bosnia Intervention and the “Wider War” Thesis.”

Here is an excerpt.

President Clinton’s assertion that the U.S.-led NATO mission in Bosnia is essential to prevent a wider European war is erroneous. Two of the wider war scenarios–Serbia as a runaway expansionist power like Nazi Germany and the prospect that the Bosnian conflict could ignite a continental conflagration just as a Balkan incident sparked World War I–are so far-fetched that they should be dismissed out of hand.

The other two scenarios–that copycat aggressors elsewhere in Europe would be emboldened by a NATO failure in Bosnia and that a Bosnia-style war could erupt in the southern Balkans, especially in Kosovo and Macedonia–have greater validity. But the success or failure of the Bosnia mission will have little impact on such dangers. Conflicts in other parts of Europe arise from local conditions and historical factors, and the belligerents will continue to pursue their unique agendas. War in the southern Balkans would not be a matter of the Bosnian conflict’s “spreading.” The disputes over Kosovo and Macedonia involve different grievances and, largely, a different set of potential adversaries.

The wider war thesis is merely a refurbished domino theory. Not every armed conflict in Europe is destined to lead to a massive war that would affect important American security interests.

…President Clinton repeatedly defended his decision to send American troops to Bosnia by insisting that if the United States and its NATO allies did not take steps to solidify the fragile peace in that country, they would risk the outbreak of a “wider war.” Such a conflict would threaten overall European stability, which is deemed important to America’s own security and well-being. Thus, in addition to any moral imperative to stop the carnage in Bosnia, the United States had no choice but to assume a leadership role to suppress the fighting, lest Europe descend into chaos for the third time this century.

The president used that reasoning in a November 1995 letter to House Speaker Newt Gingrich shortly before the signing of the Dayton accord.

This Administration, and that of previous Democratic and Republican Presidents, have been firmly committed to the principle that the security and stability of Europe is of fundamental interest to the United States. The conflict in Bosnia is the most dangerous threat to European security since the end of World War II. If the negotiations fail and the war resumes, as it in all probability would, there is the very real risk that it could spread beyond Bosnia, and involve Europe’s new democracies as well as our NATO allies. Twice this century, we paid a heavy price for turning our backs to conflict in Europe.

Secretary of State Warren Christopher had made a similar argument earlier, contending, “Twice in this century we have had to send our soldiers to fight in wars that began in Central Europe.” On another occasion he insisted that unless the Dayton peace accord succeeded, the Bosnian conflict could someday involve “the rest of Europe.” James Steinberg, director of policy planning at the State Department, was equally apocalyptic. “Without U.S. leadership in Bosnia, we would face the imminent danger of a widening war that could embroil our allies, undermine NATO’s credibility, destabilize nearby democracies, and drive a wedge between the United States and Russia.”

The president and his advisers tend to be vague, how-ever, about how the bloodletting in Bosnia could lead to a wider European war. Proponents of the U.S.-led peace enforcement mission act as though that danger were self-evident, but a careful examination suggests that most of the wider war scenarios are implausible.

That conclusion has important implications beyond the administration’s Bosnia policy, for the assumption that small conflicts will usually lead to larger ones is a crucial premise underlying Washington’s global network of security commitments. A proactive U.S. policy (including a military presence) in such regions as Europe, East Asia, and the Persian Gulf is supposedly essential because it preserves stability and makes any armed disruption less likely. Without that stabilizing U.S. role, the argument goes, there will be a proliferation of minor conflicts, any one of which may ignite a regional war that will entangle the United States. But if the wider war thesis is invalid with regard to Bosnia, serious questions ought to be raised about its validity elsewhere–indeed, about the intellectual foundation of America’s overall security strategy.

Current United States President Barack Hussein Obama, already made history repeat itself, by getting us involved in the civil war in Libya, which led to a Radical Muslim government being installed, and eventually, 4 brave Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, being savagely murdered.

Now…it appears that Obama is about to double down…

The Daily Caller’s Ariel Cohen reported yesterday that…

The White House said Friday it does not plan to send U.S. troops into Syria, despite offering aid to rebel groups fighting President Bashar al-Assad.

“Nobody has asked us to [go into Syria]. The Syrian opposition does not think that it’s a good idea,” Ben Rhodes, current Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communication, said during a White House press conference Thursday evening. ”We certainly don’t think it’s in our national interest to send U.S. troops.”

The White House distinguished their actions in the Middle East from those of the previous administration’s, expressing a reluctance to enter a scenario similar to the 2003 Iraq War.

“We need to be humble here about our ability to solve the problem in Syria,” Rhodes said. “I think recent history teaches us that even when you have U.S. troops on the ground, you’re not necessarily going to be able to prevent violence amongst civilian populations. We saw that in Iraq, for instance. And at the same time, when U.S. troops are on the ground, that involves us in a much more dramatic way of making us the issue instead of the interest of the country where we are.”

Instead of sending U.S. troops into Syria, Obama plans to help opposition groups on the ground.

“Our stated national policy is for Bashar Al-Assad leave power,” Rhodes said. “It is our preference that this be done politically, but we are going to continue supporting those in Syria who are working for a post-Assad future.”

Rhodes said that the best course of action in Syria is to strengthen a “moderate opposition that would be able to represent the broader Syrian public” by providing aid to the rebel groups, but the administration has yet to comment on the specifics of the aid.

“While I understand the interests, we’re just not going to be able to get into that level of detail about the type of resistance that we provide,” Rhodes said.

“I’m not going to be able to inventory the types of support that we’re going to provide to the [Syrian Military Council], but I’d point to my previous answers — suffice it to say that a decision has been made about providing additional direct support to the SMC to strengthen their effectiveness,” Rhodes said. “This is more a situation where we’re just not going to be able to lay out an inventory of what exactly falls under the scope of that assistance, other than to communicate that we have made that decision.”

Critics opposing U.S. involvement in Syria claim that the White House can never be completely sure who receives American aid within the rebel groups — or how they will use it.

“It is unclear what national security interests we have in the civil war in Syria,” Kentucky Republicans Sen. Rand Paul wrote in a CNN.com piece warning against American intervention in the Middle East. “It is very clear that any attempt to aid the Syrian rebels would be complicated and dangerous, precisely because we don’t know who these people are.”

As I first reported in May, there is just one problem with arming these “Freedom Fighters”. It’s the same “problem” that we faced in Libya.

BBC.co.uk reported the following on April 10th…

The leader of the al-Nusra Front, a jihadist group fighting in Syria, has pledged allegiance to the leader of al-Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Abu Mohammed al-Jawlani said the group’s behaviour in Syria would not change as a result.

Al-Nusra claims to be have carried out many suicide bombings and guerrilla attacks against state targets.

On Tuesday, al-Qaeda in Iraq announced a merger with al-Nusra, but Mr Jawlani said he had not been consulted on this.

Al-Nusra has been designated as a terrorist organisation by the US.

Debates among Western leaders over whether to arm Syria’s rebels have often raised the concern of weapons ending up in the hands of groups such as al-Nusra.

“The sons of al-Nusra Front pledge allegiance to Sheikh Ayman al-Zawahiri,” Mr Jawlani said in a recording released on Wednesday.

But Mr Jawlani said al-Nusra had not been consulted on the merger with al-Qaeda in Iraq and insisted his group would not change its stance in Syria.

The al-Nusra statement assured Syrians that the “good behaviour” they had experienced from the front on the ground would continue unchanged, the BBC’s Jim Muir reports from neighbouring Lebanon.

Mr Jawlani said that the oath of allegiance to Zawahiri “will not change anything in its policies”, our correspondent adds.

In his biography, “The Audacity of Hope”, written by Bomber Bill Ayers, Obama says that,

I will stand with them [Muslims] should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.

That ugly direction is the Middle East…again.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

BenghaziGate: Was it Hillary’s Fault?

In the latest chapter of the rapidly developing real story of the mass murder at the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya on 9/11/12, it appears the Former First Lady may have refused to send military backup that fateful night.

Eli Lake reports for The Daily Beast:

On the night of the 9/11 anniversary assault at the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, the Americans defending the compound and a nearby CIA annex were severely outmanned. Nonetheless, the State Department never requested military backup that evening, two senior U.S. officials familiar with the details of military planning tell The Daily Beast.

In its seventh week, discussion about what happened in Benghazi has begun to focus on why military teams in the region did not respond to the assault on the U.S. mission and the nearby CIA annex. The only security backup that did arrive that evening were former special-operations soldiers under the command of the CIA—one from the nearby annex and another Quick Reaction Force from Tripoli. On Friday, Fox News reported that requests from CIA officers for air support on the evening of the attacks were rejected. (The Daily Beast was not able to confirm that those requests were made, though no U.S. official contacted for this story directly refuted the claim either.)

It’s unlikely any outside military team could have arrived in Benghazi quickly enough to save Ambassador Chris Stevens or his colleague Sean Smith, both of whom died from smoke inhalation after a band of more than 100 men overran the U.S. mission at around 9:30 p.m. that evening and set the buildings inside ablaze.

But military backup may have made a difference at around five the following morning, when a second wave of attackers assaulted the CIA annex where embassy personnel had taken refuge. It was during this second wave of attacks that two ex-SEALs working for the CIA’s security teams—Glenn Doherty and Tyrone Woods—were killed in a mortar strike.

Normally it would be the job of the U.S. ambassador on location to request a military response. But Stevens likely died in the first two hours of the attack. The responsibility for requesting military backup would then have fallen to the deputy chief of mission at Benghazi or officials at the State Department in Washington.

“The State Department is responsible for assessing security at its diplomatic installations and for requesting support from other government agencies if they need it,” a senior U.S. Defense official said. “There was no request from the Department of State to intervene militarily on the night of the attack.”

The president, however, would have the final say as to whether or not to send in the military. By 11 p.m. Benghazi time, 90 minutes after the assault began on the U.S. mission, Obama met with the National Security Council to discuss the attack. NSC spokesman Tommy Vietor said the president “ordered Secretary Panetta and Chairman Dempsey to begin moving assets into the region to prepare for a range of contingencies” at that meeting.

Last summer, the second “issue” of  reutersmagazine.com debuted at the Aspen Ideas Festival. This edition featured an article titled “Hillary vs. the World”.

While actually a Liberal Fluff Piece, it does offers some insight into the way the Liberals and the Former First Lady view her job as the US Secretary of State, a job she has proven to be woefully unqualified for:

…Three and a half years later, there have been remarkably few accounts of feuding between Obama’s White House and Clinton’s State Department—and virtually none between the president himself and his celebrity diplomat. Even so, no one even attempts to claim that Clinton and Obama have forged anything other than a solid professional relationship. If there’s an inner circle of Obama decision-making, Clinton is not in it. And the optimistically ambitious foreign policy agenda of early 2009 has inevitably collided with reality; long since jettisoned are many of the early ideas about reshaping the world for the Obama era—from talking directly to Iran’s ayatollahs to forging a durable Mideast peace built on an American-led push to end Israeli settlements in the West Bank. On the campaign trail, Obama has transformed himself instead into an unlikely tough guy, emphasizing his decision to launch the risky special ops raid that killed Osama bin Laden (which Clinton supported), as well as his moves to draw down the American presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Clinton and then-Defense Secretary Bob Gates argued in favor of Obama’s 2009 troop surge.)

For her part, Clinton tends to tout a list of accomplishments that are somewhat short of transformative, if still substantial—from her leadership in pushing a strategic “pivot” to Asia, announced last fall in an article for Foreign Policy, to the extensive personal diplomacy she poured into quickly mobilizing the NATO coalition that launched air strikes to topple Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi. More broadly, if less tangibly, she has put new emphasis at a time of global financial crisis on the role of what she calls “economic statecraft,” including the appointment of the State Department’s first chief economist. She has launched a major reboot of American development efforts modeled on the Pentagon’s quadrennial strategic reviews and has called for an “Internet freedom agenda” that would mobilize new technology on behalf of democracy activists and dissidents the world over, an agenda that has seemed both problematic—bad guys have these tools too—and prescient in anticipating the technology-fueled protests that swept the Middle East during last year’s Arab Spring.

Then there’s managing her in-box, where never a day goes by without some new global headache being added to the mix, a headache that will inevitably require a Clinton phone call, or a meeting, or a flight halfway around the world after having just gotten off a plane. Asked how she approaches the job, Clinton often replies by saying she has to do it all. She has to watch, as she puts it, “the trend lines and the headlines.”

Hillary, along with her boss, President Barack Hussein Obama had a lot to lose, if the Islamic Terrorist attack on the Consulate in Benghazi was revealed to be what it actually was, to the world, in real time. That’s why they came up with the cock and bull story about the “offensive Youtube Video”.

The Benghazi mass murder at our Consulate by those Muslim Terrorists would blow “Smart Power!” all to Hades and back, again. And, the CIC and the SOS simply could not allow that to happen.

Unfortunately for them, their lies are rapidly being replaced by the truth.

Just in time for Election Day.