More than Noise

It will be interesting to see how the next 24-48 hours unfold following the airing of O on 60 Minutes last night. I can not stomach watching him so I am relying on reporters and analysts about the show. Hopefully I will find a transcript of the interview.

Debka which is an Israeli independent news and intelligence website has an article tying O’s remarks as further proof that he will not cooperate with Netanyahu in reference to joint military action or even a definitive red-line.  The Weekly Standard has an article pointing out the O’s language about Israel mirrors Ahmadinejad’s remarks about Israel.

The election is too close to call and that apparently translates into putting Netanyahu at an arm’s length. Conversation over the phone will not produce a photo-op that can be shared, printed and appear as cooperation and alliance. Phone calls make it easier to be formal and distant. O and his election campaign managers and consultants apparently believe that they need to have Israel stand on point in the matter of Iranian nuclear production and proliferation. Iran knows that with the current USA administration that talking while working clandestinely is the best SOP because as long as nothing  is flagrant then USA military action will not occur.

For O if suddenly Iran produced a nuclear bomb it would merely be an intelligence failure. For Israel it may very well be an end of existence.

The imagery O uses referring to Netanyahu’s pleas for help as “noise” reflects O’s ignorance or ulterior motives. For example, a man is sitting on a bench waiting for a bus and reading a book. Coming from behind him he hears exclamations “Help! Fire! Call 911!” He sits up a bit, looks down the street for the bus and then resumes reading his book. “Please! My family is inside! Someone please help! Mister on the bench please get us help! Please call 911!” The gentleman furrows his brow determined to focus on reading his book. “Help! Please help!” The bus pulls up, he stands up and enters the bus. The driver asks him what is going on? “I don’t know I was trying to read but their was a lot of noise out there.”

Pleas for help when action is needed is not noise unless you are one who does not want to act.

Lies – pin the tail on the donkey (Obama)

Weekly Standard article
CBS article

Thanks to the Drudge Report – this morning I’ve come across some stinging and truthful commentary on O and his administration’s deceptive dealing with the 9/11 Benghazi murders. I am not a TV news watcher so I am not sure if the truth is gaining traction in the typical MSM TV industry.  I’ve noticed the truth is receiving selected traction on CNN. By that I mean they are not connecting the dots for their audience and presenting very few facts about those who died, exactly what happened and no mention of O and his administration deliberately lying – again – about this type of activity.

A new bit of information (at least to me) is from the The Daily Beast:

“What’s more, two U.S. intelligence officials told The Daily Beast that the intelligence community is currently analyzing an intercept between a Libyan politician whose sympathies are with al Qaeda and the Libyan militia known as the February 17 Brigade—which had been charged with providing local security to the consulate. In the intercept, the Libyan politician apparently asks an officer in the brigade to have his men stand down for a pending attack—another piece of evidence implying the violence was planned in advance. (Plenty of Libyans, of course, did try to protect the consulate. “Many of those Libyans died in the gunfight fighting off the attackers,” one of the officials said. “But there were some bad apples there as well.”)”

Thing is, that I justifiably distrust our administration so much that I can see them floating this lie so as to turn away the quite possible truth that O and his administration did not provide efficient security for the Ambassador. In other words making someone in Libya the culprit and not the poor leadership and understanding of the chief empty suit.

 

 

Admission Yet Lacking Honesty & Transparency

In today’s NYT there are two stories (1 and 2) that focus on the TERRORIST ATTACK on the US Mission in Benghazi. O’s pathetic administration while finally admitting it was a terrorist attack is not willing to completely let go of their attempted spin of the events. Read carefully Carney’s comments in response to 9/11 in the second article. As the writers point out in the article, O and his administration insist on downplaying the actual events that transpired that day. I believe that it will undoubtedly trickle down to what the administration will say that the FBI’s findings will be. Justifiably some members of Congress are infuriated by the shenanigans of O and his administration in reference to the events in Benghazi.

Who actually wants a president of their country to be so unethical?
How can you really trust them with the big and little things that come across their desk?
You – as a voter – as a citizen of the USA, what do you hope to gain from such a president?

These are the questions each voter needs to ask themselves and then answer themselves honestly.
Problem is many of the voters are unethical and they will simply keep lying to themselves and others.

Obama official: Benghazi was a terrorist attack

It WAS a terrorist attack.

Curious how long it will take to get cleared up in the MSM. Curious if they will reiterate the correction.
At this moment the admission seems to have been done quietly.

_____________________________________________________________________________

The Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was in fact “a terrorist attack” and the U.S. government has indications that members of al Qaeda were directly involved, a top Obama administration official said Wednesday morning.

“I would say yes, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy,” Matt Olsen, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said Wednesday at a hearing of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, in response to questioning from Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-CT) about the attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

As for who was responsible, Olsen said it appears there were attackers from a number of different militant groups that operate in and around Benghazi, and said there are already signs of al Qaeda involvement.

“We are looking at indications that individuals involved in the attack may have had connections to al Qaeda or al Qaeda’s affiliates; in particular, al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb,” he said.

The U.S. government just isn’t sure yet whether the terrorist attack was pre-planned or whether it was an example of terrorists taking advantage of protests against an anti-Islam film, Olsen said.

“It appears that individuals who were certainly well-armed seized on the opportunity presented as the events unfolded that evening and into the morning hours of September 12th. We do know that a number of militants in the area, as I mentioned, are well-armed and maintain those arms. What we don’t have at this point is specific intelligence that there was a significant advanced planning or coordination for this attack,” he said.

His statements go further than those of the White House Press Secretary Jay Carneywho said last week that the protests in Cairo and Benghazi were a reaction to the video and not a pre-planned attack. Today, Carney didn’t repeat the assertion that the video was solely to blame, but he said again that there is no evidence the Benghazi attack was pre-planned.

“What I can tell you is that, as I said last week, as … our ambassador to the United Nations said on Sunday and as I said the other day, based on what we know now and knew at the time, we have no evidence of a preplanned or premeditated attack,” Carney said Wednesday. “It is a simple fact that there are in post-revolution, post-war Libya armed groups; there are bad actors hostile to the government, hostile to the West, hostile to the United States. And as has been the case in other countries in the region, it is certainly conceivable that these groups take advantage of and exploit situations that develop, when they develop, to protest against or attack either Westerners, Americans, Western sites, or American sites.”

Committee ranking Republican Susan Collins (R-ME) declared at the hearing that she believes the attacks were planned well in advance and she referenced information she had received from U.S. intelligence officials behind closed doors.

“First, I will tell you that based on the briefings I have had, I’ve come to the opposite conclusion and agree with the president of Libya that this was a premeditated, planned attack that was associated with the date of 9/11, the anniversary of 9/11,” she said. “I just don’t think that people come to protests equipped with RPGs and other heavy weapons. And the reports of complicity — and they are many — with the Libyan guards who were assigned to guard the consulate also suggest to me that this was premeditated.”

Collins said she was concerned by the lack of security at the Benghazi consulate, especially since there had been an attack on the mission in June and a more serious attack on the British ambassador’s convoy as well. Olsen said the U.S. government was aware of the danger but not of impending attack that killed the four Americans.

“So there were reports detailing those attacks and detailing generally the threat that was faced to U.S. and Western individuals and interests in Eastern Libya from, again, armed militants as well as elements connected to al Qaeda,” he said. “There was no specific intelligence regarding an imminent attack prior to September 11th on our post in Benghazi.”

2 cents

Mr. Krauthammer’s most recent column once again points out the non-sense that is O’s SOP in the Iran nuclear issue. As I see it either O has a diabolical motive or he really is ignorant. In either case if he was a manager of my business he would be fired. I don’t see a logical argument for him being retained.

He doesn’t represent me or my best interests or – more importantly – our nation’s best interest. By his own admission the white middle class he has written off which means he is targeting representation of the black (96% voted for him – but that is not racism), Hispanic, Asian and lower class white and upper class white/aka celebrities. MSM is trying to spin Romney’s recently released comments as he is class warrior but that is not what he said. I agree that he could have put it a little more elegantly but the essence of what he is saying is true. It is in a lot of ways no different that O’s comments last Oct/Nov.

Ladies and gentlemen, our country is really screwed up. I am serious. We have a serious problem in the way a lot, and maybe even the majority, think and expect. Politics has always been brutal, just read the books about our founding fathers and the early times that originally shaped our nation. Note – I wrote – originally. Because for just about all purposes we are not THAT nation any longer. We have a nation that is spiritually ignorant and morally absent. Our nation is one of “receiving and getting” and demanding even more “stuff” and “programs”. On the whole our society is dependent on the government (federal and state) for their livelihood. That is NOT the nation of the original intent. Redistribution of wealth (as O beliefs and wants to practice) was foreign to our ancestors.

We need systemic change to occur and for many people because of their level of dependency on the government it will be a VERY painful change but it still needs to occur. For most if not all addictions/dependency, abstaining is the best solution. It will also mean and necessitate the development of willpower/volition on many/most citizens. It will require daily decisions to do one’s best so as not to “slip” and embrace dependency once again.

 

cultural clash?

An interesting article in this morning’s NYT about reason and implications for all the protest and violence over the video.

2 cents: it appears that a very limited few see the unreasonableness of their response to the video. Protests do not have to lead to murder or even violence.