BZ
Accomplishments of Obama:
Tag Archives: Benghazi
Benghazi and Boko Haram: the common delineator is Hillary Clinton
Benghazi proved to be a terrible tragedy involving the deaths of four good Americans, as is the current Boko Haram kidnapping of the 270+ girls in Nigeria.
Hillary Clinton, the smartest woman in politics, got both of those issues wrong. She is the common delineator between these two disastrous events. She had choices to make and she chose poorly; people died as a result of her decisions.
First, Islamists and al Qaeda were responsible for Benghazi but the Obama Administration could not admit their failure because they had just touted that Mr Obama had al Qaeda “on the run,” “decimated” and “on the path to defeat.”
[Another reason I love events immured in YouTube. You can’t fudge the facts.]
Then came Benghazi and four Americans were sacrificed on the altar of political expediency and Demorat coverups. Susan Rice, former UN Ambassador, said:
A bald-faced lie by the duplicitous to the addled and soft-brained amongst us.
Next: the lie by Mr Obama whilst speaking at the United Nations:
I’m sure that, at the time, al Qaeda was wondering: “just what the hell are you talking about?” It determined: thanks; you’re playing right into our hands. We salute you.
Hillary Rodham Clinton continued to enable the duplicitous Benghazi Meme:
Whilst Demorats did their best to minimize the importance of the Benghazi deaths, Conservatives continued to insist that those four deaths had importance and that we as a nation and government needed to understand and recognize our mistakes in order that those mistake not reoccur and that the four deaths were not meaningless or in vain.
My posts:
- The Spite House knew;
- General: “We should have tried.”
- Benghazi and Patrick Caddell;
- The House votes to establish a select committee on Benghazi;
- Trey Gowdy: Obama Administration hiding Benghazi survivors;
And some base questions: just who told Hillary Rodham Clinton to blame the video? Where was she at the time of the attack? Where was Barack Hussein Obama? Why the so very long response time for our citizens?
Perhaps now — with this Select Committee — there might be a slight opportunity for the truth to unveil itself? Because, after all, the more people try to stonewall, the more there must be to know.
Now that Boko Haram has revealed its true Islamist and Sharia Law bent, people in the United States are starting to become “upset.”
But let’s go back, shall we, to the nexus of Boko Haram and Hillary Rodham Clinton, in terms of her refusing — as Secretary of State — to quantify Boko Haram as an FTO (Foreign Terrorist Organization).
Josh Rogin at TheDailyBeast.com wrote:
Hillary’s State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists
Under Hillary Clinton, the State Department repeatedly declined to fully go after the terror group responsible for kidnapping hundreds of girls.
But whose inaction spurred on the attackers? Her own in 2012.
“The one thing she could have done, the one tool she had at her disposal, she didn’t use. And nobody can say she wasn’t urged to do it. It’s gross hypocrisy,” said a former senior U.S. official who was involved in the debate. “The FBI, the CIA, and the Justice Department really wanted Boko Haram designated, they wanted the authorities that would provide to go after them, and they voiced that repeatedly to elected officials.”
In May 2012, then-Justice Department official Lisa Monaco (now at the White House) wrote to the State Department to urge Clinton to designate Boko Haram as a terrorist organization. The following month, Gen. Carter Ham, the chief of U.S. Africa Command, said that Boko Haram “are likely sharing funds, training, and explosive materials” with al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb. And yet, Hillary Clinton’s State Department still declined to place Boko Haram on its official terrorist roster.
Who actually placed Boko Haram on the FTO list? Of all people, John Kerry, after a series of Christian church bombings in Nigeria.
Let me unequivocally state that the kidnapping occurred roughly one month ago, on April 14th. One month. Yet the dainty sensibilities of Leftists weren’t upset until last week.
When Leftists do something, they are being good. When Conservatives do something they are being “partisan.”
Further (you’ll love this): here’s a long forgotten point from MoveOn.org: their poll to urge then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton not to declare Boko Haram a terrorist group:
This is an amazing bit of defeatist pussified crap from people who are predominantly cowards. They advocate “dialogue.” There is no “dialogue” with terrorists or Islamists or criminals or psychopaths. They want what they want when they want it and couldn’t care less about “dialogue.” They only care about two things: 1) their strength and 2) your weakness.
A “hashtag” #BringBackOurGirls won’t bring back anyone, much less the girls — including Christian girls — at all. It merely serves to dupe and assuage the senseless Emos amongst us.
Michelle Obama holding up a sign won’t bring back anyone, much less the girls, at all.
A nice discussion between John Kerry and Boko Haram leaders around a nice ebon table and some soothing cups of tea won’t bring back anyone, much less the girls, at all.
How can the Leftists decry Boko Haram and yet refuse to let Ayaan Hirsi Ali speak at Brandeis University — a woman who is a clear critic of Boko Haram, al Qaeda and Islamists? Muslims who in turn believe in female genital mutilation and honor killings? By Muslims who think that women are nothing more than chattel? How hypocritical can that be? How insane can that be? Boko Haram is only worth criticism when young girls are threatened?
On that note: apparently the killing of fifty-nine little boys by Boko Haram in February of this year doesn’t count at all. I don’t see Michelle Obama holding up a sign saying #bringbackourboys. Nor do I see celebrities all a-twitter on Twitter even mentioning that horrible incident.
Why? I submit because it’s about little boys, not little girls. Little girls kidnapped = Huge Deal. Little boys killed and burned to the bone = no deal at all.
Thank you Leftists.
Thank you Hillary Clinton.
BZ
P.S.
Everything You Need To Know About The Schoolgirl Kidnapping In Nigeria is here.
House votes to establish select committee on Benghazi
From FoxNews.com:
The House voted Thursday to establish a select committee on Benghazi, formally launching a comprehensive and contentious investigation aimed at answering lingering questions about what happened before, during and after the terror attack that killed four Americans.
The House voted 232-186 to approve the panel. The vote breakdown was 225 Republicans and 7 Democrats in favor, with 186 Democrats voting against the measure. The Democrats were all moderate to conservative party members who face tough re-election campaigns.
The vote was never in doubt, as majority Republicans largely were united in support of the committee ever since House Speaker John Boehner called for it last week. Unclear is whether Democrats will boycott the investigation itself.
Of course, the vote was primarily partisan because the Demorats simply want to avoid the issue of four American deaths. It’s terribly inconvenient, you see, both for Mr Obama and for Hillary Clinton.
Immediately after the vote, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., issued a statement accusing Republicans of “unending eagerness to exploit” the four American deaths in Benghazi, adding, “our nation deserves better than yet another deeply partisan and political review.”
As, simultaneously, the Demorats seek to bury the issue because it places the administration in a very poor light. The bottom line is this: the more the Demorats and the Obama Administration stonewalls, the more the truth needs to be unearthed.
And oh, Trey Gowdy will head the committee. An excellent choice.
BZ
Greg Gutfeld:
“The good news here is that CNN is finally covering Benghazi, because they think that’s where the airplane went.”
BZ
Military intelligence official: ‘We should have tried’ to help Americans during Benghazi attack
From FoxNews.com:
A top military intelligence official at the time of the Benghazi attacks testified Thursday that U.S. personnel “should have tried” to help Americans under fire on Sept. 11, 2012, in an unprecedented public statement from a leading military officer.
Retired Brig. Gen. Robert Lovell, who at the time of the attacks was the deputy intelligence director at U.S. Africa Command, questioned the merits of the ongoing debate over whether U.S. military forces could have responded in time. Leading Pentagon and other military officials previously have argued that additional U.S. assets were not deployed to assist Americans under attack that night because they weren’t close enough.
“The point is we should have tried,” Lovell told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, in his opening statement. “As another saying goes — always move to the sound of the guns.”
But — again — more pointedly:
He later said the military “could have made a response of some sort.” Lovell, who was stationed in Germany during the attack, made clear repeatedly that the military was waiting for clearance from the State Department to intervene in Benghazi.
Note: “waiting for clearance from the State Department to intervene in Benghazi.”
And who controlled the State Department then? Correct: Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Lovell also sharply countered claims that the intelligence community and military initially thought this was a protest over an anti-Islam video gone awry. He said U.S. officials knew this was a “hostile action” from the outset, even though they didn’t know how long the attack would last.
“This was no demonstration gone terribly awry,” Lovell said. “The facts led to the conclusion of a terrorist attack.”
“No demonstration gone awry.” Precisely the opposite of the talking points demanded of Susan Rice for the Sunday news shows directly following 9-11-12.
Just as I wrote here.
Two years. We’re just now hearing these things. Things that many people already sensed inherently. And still an ignorant dupe sits in federal prison.
BZ
