International Affairs: October 2012 Archives
Newly released emails prove that Obama knew about the true nature of the Benghazi attack while it was in progress and then lied about it to America for weeks.
Three separate e-mails were sent to the White House on Sept. 11:The first email, timed at 4:05 p.m. Washington time -- or 10:05 p.m. Benghazi time, 20-30 minutes after the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission allegedly began -- carried the subject line "U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack" and the notation "SBU", meaning "Sensitive But Unclassified."The text said the State Department's regional security office had reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was "under attack. Embassy in Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well."
The message continued: "Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four ... personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support."
A second email, headed "Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi" and timed 4:54 p.m. Washington time, said that the Embassy in Tripoli had reported that "the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi had stopped and the compound had been cleared." It said a "response team" was at the site attempting to locate missing personnel.
A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: "Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack."
The message reported: "Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli."
Yet the president and his advisers repeatedly told us the attack was spontaneous reaction to the anti-Muslim video and that it lacked information suggesting it was a terrorist assault.
Obama should resign. This is so far beyond Watergate... it's a national disgrace.
Kevin DuJan explains why you never cross the Clintons.
I fully expect Hillary Clinton to do something to retaliate against both Jay Carney personally and also Joe Biden in the next few weeks. She'll do it before the election...but won't touch Obama until after he's defeated, in which case I'm sure a lot of things will miraculously be made available to the incoming Romney administration (and its Justice Department) that were supposed to be shredded or buried in vaults somewhere. Ooops! Remember: Hillary Clinton can never do anything that harms Obama because she needs black people for her 2016 campaign...and the only thing that can keep her from being the nominee in 2016 is if she doesn't have the support of blacks. Being Secretary of State for the last four years was to show blacks that there was no hard feelings between Hillary and Obama and that all the racial rhetoric Obama churned up against the Clintons in the primaries should be forgotten. Hillary can't be the next nominee without blacks firmly behind her, and she knows it.
I'm so excited!
Added bonus: when will CIA Director General Petraeus weigh in? It's his agency that the Obama and Biden are blaming for the wrong information, and there are few people with more stature and gravitas. Would you be eager to pick a fight with the Clintons and the most popular and successful living general?
Obama's lies about the attacks in Libya are bad enough, but why hasn't America yet responded?
It took less than four weeks after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, for the Bush administration to gather intelligence, plan the full-scale invasion of Afghanistan and begin executing Operation Enduring Freedom. By October 7, 2001, multinational forces from the United States, Britain and Australia were on the ground, linking up with friendly Afghan forces, overthrowing the Taliban and driving al-Qaeda from the haven from which they had attacked our country. ...This is not to suggest an invasion of Libya. But certainly by now we could have identified the groups responsible for the attack, targeted their compounds and retaliated in some fashion. Heck, the Libyan people have done more to retaliate than Obama has. The Associated Press reports that a few days after the attack, "Hundreds of protesters seized control of several militia headquarters ... including the compound of one of Libya's strongest armed Islamic extremist groups, evicting militiamen and setting fire to buildings as the attack that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans sparked a backlash against armed groups."
What kind of signal does it send when a Libyan mob does more to avenge the killing of an American ambassador than the president of the United States?
Our enemies need to learn that they cannot attack us and kill us with impunity. We need to respond to violence with violence. We must kill our enemies, because they're eager to kill us.
Setting forest fires is one of several terrorism tactics that many people have hesitated to mention because no one wants to give al-Qaeda any ideas.
"One should note that setting fires to forests in the countries of the European Union is a new tendency in al-Qaeda's strategy of a 'thousand cuts'," Alexander Bortnikov said, according to state news agency RIA Novosti, at a meeting of heads of security agencies."This method allows (al-Qaeda) to inflict significant economic and moral damage without serious preliminary preparations, technical equipment or significant expenses."
It's hard to prove arson, and it's hard to catch the arsonists when the fires themselves aren't discovered for a long time after they're started. There's no reason this tactic wouldn't work in America, if it hasn't already and we just don't know it.
