Thursday, November 15, 2012

Stuff for a Thursday

It has taken over two months for Obama to fabricate a set of responses on Benghazi.

Two months.


I can tell you that immediately upon finding out that our folks were in danger, that my orders to my National Security team were do whatever we need to do to make sure they’re safe. And that’s the same order that I would give anytime that I see Americans are in danger, whether they’re civilian or military, because that’s our number one priority.

One knows this to be a lie for several reasons.

Testimony given to a congressional committee investigating the Benghazi attack revealed that requests for help were routinely ignored, even after smaller attacks in Tripoli and Benghazi. Eventually, the State Department told those in Libya: 

It is hard to believe that even reports such as those were never filtered to a commander-in-chief who routinely skipped intelligence briefings.

At the time of the attack, a series of e-mails detailing it were sent by the State Department Operations Center to the State Department, the FBI and the White House situation room where Obama claimed he watched the attack unfold. For two weeks, he and his staff blamed the attack on a Youtube video. If Obama was in the situation room, as he later claimed, why would he lie about it? Further, why did he not send a response team, an extraction team or order a gunship or drone strike, all from the White House situation room? These things were never done. Either Obama was never in the situation room at all or did not order any action taken for one reason or another. The lie about the Youtube video was an embarrassingly bad bit of fiction given that no riot was caught on closed circuit cameras and that it’s not plausible for any random rioter to just happen to have missile launchers handy. Obama’s inaction may have been because Ambassador Stevens was a “point-man” for a gun-running scheme or, as now bandied about, the embassy held (illegally) some key Libyan assets. What are the answers? Obama would have to answer these sorts of questions in front of a senate or congressional hearing and hopefully on live television.

Back to the video…

If Obama was in the White House situation room, why did he not say so in the first place? Why was a video blamed for the attack on the American embassy in Benghazi? If he had said he was in the situation room, the American people would have understood that he was where he was supposed to be at such a time. They would then ask why no action was taken. Hard questions to answer. But did Obama think that the American people were really so gullible as to believe that a video was to blame? He certainly tried to sell it that way. Never once did he reveal the identity of the attackers or even use the words “terrorism” or “terrorist”. He blamed a video, put out an apologetic commercial in Pakistan, and said nothing of any real consequence to the UN. His ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, too, blamed the Youtube video for the attack. Obama has since defended her deception (ordered deception?). She is the second woman to have been thrown under the proverbial bus in this debacle.

Obama will have to answer these questions though I feel he will do everything he can not to.

And Americans should care about this. There is plenty of space under wheel wells for everyone with this man.

On the heels of David Petraeus agreeing to testify on the Libya terror attack, Republican senators on Wednesday stepped up their call to empanel a "select committee" to investigate the tragedy -- as they raised concern that the administration's internal review would fall short. 

"Let me be clear: there is no credibility among most of us concerning the administration and the numerous controversies and contradictions that have been involved in their handling of this issue," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said, at a lengthy news conference on Capitol Hill. 

McCain was joined by Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., in calling for a temporary Senate committee established specifically to investigate Libya. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid later said he would not support their proposal. 

The call for what would effectively be a new investigation comes as lawmakers continue to pry into the administration's narrative on what happened before, during and after the attack that killed four Americans. In a victory for lawmakers -- at least those who will hear from him -- Petraeus volunteered to speak to the House and Senate intelligence committees perhaps as early as this week on Libya. 

Palestinian terrorists barraged Israel with more than 200 rockets on Thursday, killing three people as Israel pressed a punishing campaign of airstrikes on militant targets across the Gaza Strip. Three rockets targeted the densely populated Tel Aviv area, setting off air-raid sirens in brazen attacks that threatened to trigger an Israeli ground invasion of Gaza.

There is no peaceful resolution that the Gazans would be happy with. This is history repeating itself.

Blink and you miss Xi Jinping:

Xi Jinping has become leader of China, securing the Communist Party's top spot as the country faces slower economic growth and rising public demands for change.

(Sidebar: NO, China did NOT choose a new leader. Communist dictatorship, CTV.)

Liberal leadership frontrunner Justin Trudeau lashed out at a Sun News reporter today.

Reporter Alexandra Gunn was questioning whether Trudeau would ask Liberal candidate for Durham Grant Humes to remove controversial links from his campaign webpage, when he snapped at her.

Humes has recently come under fire by local vets for using Liberal campaign signs supporting veterans to link to a party donation site (

The attack on Gunn occurred while Trudeau was campaigning at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology and Durham College in Oshawa, Ontario.

When asked if there would be an apology for the posting, Trudeau responded, "If there was a problem with the website link then I know that it was done in good faith."

When Gunn then asked Mr. Trudeau if he would ask Mr. Humes to remove the controversial links, Trudeau responded in anger.

"I'm asking Mr. Harper to take care of our veterans. How's that? I'm asking Mr. Harper to respect the veterans that he hides behind every single step of the day. And the fact that you're not asking about that is frankly disingenuous, but I expect no better from Sun News."

65% of the 392 top colleges surveyed maintain speech codes and other restrictions on expression that violate First Amendment principles… No wonder a study of 24,000 students conducted by the Association of American Colleges and Universities in 2010 revealed that only 30.3% of college seniors strongly agreed with the statement that, “It is safe to hold unpopular opinions on campus”… The students were downright optimistic compared to the 9,000 campus professionals surveyed. Only 18.8% strongly agreed that it was safe to hold unpopular opinions on campus... As the sociologist Diana C. Mutz discovered in her 2006 book Hearing the Other Side, those with the highest levels of education had the lowest exposure to people with conflicting points of view, while those who have not graduated from high school can claim the most diverse discussion mates. In other words, the most educated among us are also the most likely to live in the tightest echo chambers

This is the left and that was their illusory hold on tolerance, the broad ends of the political spectrum and intelligence.

And now,  let our hearts be softened by a cat and the grandmother who loved it.

No comments: