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.

 

 

icubudLeave a comment

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.

icubudLeave a comment

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 Carney, who 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.”

icubudLeave a comment

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.

 

icubudLeave a comment

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.

icubudLeave a comment

Motives – Benghazi, Israel & Obama

Some comments about the events over the past week in the Middle East.

One, it is important to O that the events of Benghazi be interpreted under the guise of the video that has been labeled as anti-Mohammad. Why? Because O had promised during the last presidential election campaign to resolve the anti-America sentiment of Islamists. See he would usher in an era of peace and understanding. Central to this action was his apologetic speech to all Muslims in Cairo during his first year as president. If the events of Benghazi were a planned attack and that even in reference to 9/11 as well as the recent death of another A-Q leader, then clearly O not only failed on this campaign promise it also shows his lack of understanding and ignorance about the whole ideological war.  This is a point that Romney-Ryan need to bang home to the US citizens.

Second, the red line Israel wants from the O administration. O says when the US knows for certain that Iran is going to make a nuclear weapon THEN when will the US act militarily. This obviously is a dangerous position to base one’s actions on and Israel wants to make sure that that is the only red line option O has or if there is room for one prior to that realization. Now what I am going to share will probably not be popular but unless I learn some truth that rebuts I am standing on this position. I am persuaded that O’s desire is to push the nuclear weapon argument against Israel. My way of thinking is this: O punts the heavy reality of his goal to a second term or at worst that it be the next administration’s problem. Let’s say – horror of horrors that O wins a second term as president of the US. I believe his plan is to roll out like: “Iran, what will it take to ensure you will not seek a nuclear weapon?” Response> “when all countries in the Middle East do not have this technology – meaning specifically – Israel.” O to Israel> “this is a fair request > we need Israel to admit to its nuclear weapons and agree to have them destroyed.” This will shift the onus of the nuclear discussion off of Iran and put the pressure and the black hat on Israel.

As you can see this is not a discussion he wants to take place before the election. Such action would likely result in his defeat. The use of drones that he has allowed is not a contradiction ideologically to what I figure his goal is because the drones use is against extreme terrorist Muslims which are sowing discontent during his presidency. I am fully persuaded that a second term would include a drastic reduction if not elimination of drone use to kill terrorists.

We desperately need a regime change in DC and hopefully in November we will receive the news that it is coming soon.

icubudLeave a comment