The Hidden Mission Forum

Full Version: The Scandal That Will Bring Obama Down
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
http://www.westernjournalism.com/the-sca...bama-down/
Quote:The Scandal That Will Bring Obama Down

January 11, 2013 By Floyd and Mary Beth Brown 79 Comments


It’s even worse than we previously thought. A retired four-star admiral is now claiming that Barack Obama intentionally conspired with America’s enemies to stage a bogus attack and the kidnapping of an American ambassador so he could “negotiate” the release of a “hostage” and bolster his mediocre approval ratings just prior to the election!




The Washington Examiner, quoting retired Four-Star Admiral James Lyons, writes: “the attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi… was the result of a bungled abduction attempt…. the first stage of an international prisoner exchange… that would have ensured the release of Omar Abdel Rahman, the ‘Blind Sheik’…”

But something went horribly wrong with Obama’s “October Surprise.” Although the Obama Administration intentionally gutted security at the consulate prior to the staged kidnapping, former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty disobeyed direct orders to stand down, saved American lives, single-handedly killed scores of attackers…and the attackers, believing that Obama had betrayed them, tortured Ambassador Chris Stevens and dragged his body through the streets.

Some will say that Admiral Lyons’ accusation is not a smoking gun. We agree; that’s exactly why Congress must investigate Benghazi-gate.

Moreover, we firmly believe the problem with Admiral Lyons’ assertion is that he is only scratching the surface; the full and complete truth may be much, much worse.

Benghazi-gate is not about a bogus YouTube video series of lies. It’s not about the Obama Administration’s foreign policy ineptitude. We are dealing with something much more sinister… something potentially treasonous… and the following questions, posed in an article in The New American, go to the heart of the matter:




1.      ”What was the Obama administration’s full role in helping violent Jihadists, self-styled al Qaeda terrorists, and Western-backed “revolutionaries” take over Libya in the first place?

2.      Did that half-baked scheme to arm Jihadist leaders, who… had previously fought U.S. troops in Iraq, contribute to the attack, as countless experts and officials have suggested?

3.      What was actually going on at the compound in Benghazi, which, as the report states, was never a “consulate” despite establishment media claims?

4.      Was Ambassador Stevens recruiting and arming Jihadists and terrorists to wage war on the Syrian regime after what Obama called the “success” in Libya, as a growing body of credible evidence suggests?

5.      Why did the administration claim for so long that the attack was just a “protest” over a YouTube video gone awry, even when it knew definitively that was not the case?

6.      Was the lack of security at the compound a political ploy to conceal the extent of the lawlessness and utter chaos left in the wake of Obama’s unconstitutional “regime change” war on Libya, as even members of Congress have alleged?”

It’s clear. Benghazi-Gate is only a small piece of a much larger operation, an attempt to conceal what The New American calls “the Obama administration’s full role in helping violent Jihadists and self-styled al Qaeda terrorists.”

Prior to the election Barack Obama continually told us that “Osama bin-Laden is dead and GM is alive”; but the sad truth is that Osama bin-Laden’s organization is alive and well, and the Obama Regime may be giving aid and comfort to this terrorist network.

And prior to the election, Fox News’ Geraldo Rivera pontificated that Republicans shouldn’t “politicize” Benghazi-gate. Swaggering onto the set of Fox and Friends, Rivera bloviated: “I think we have to stop this politicizing.” And Rivera issued the following veiled warning to Republicans: “Do we want to try and influence the election with a tragedy that happened in North Africa?”

Ironic, isn’t it? Barack Obama played politics with the lives of Americans; like Rivera, the media covered Obama’s rear and threatened to accuse anyone and everyone who mentioned it of “playing politics.”

Weak-willed Republicans apparently took Rivera’s threat to heart as Rivera also said that Republican Senators John Barrasso, James Inhofe, and Bob Corker, who all sit on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “all agree that the supercharged atmosphere around the story — prudence dictates that these hearings be postponed until” after the election.

Well, the election has come and gone. Congress now has no excuse. The American people needed the truth before the election; but now that Obama is back in the White House, real conservatives must demand answers.

The American people deserve to have those questions answered; and moreover, the American people deserve justice.
http://www.examiner.com/article/air-forc...media-deaf

Air Force General blows whistle on Obama, but media deaf
Government corruption
September 17, 2011
By: Jim Kouri
Subscribe
.

General Shelton told lawmakers that he was pressured to be less than honest by the White House when he gives testimony before Congress.


“
"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"



"If an Air Force general blows the whistle on the Obama White House, does anyone in the media hear the corruption?"




A United States Air Force general is blowing the whistle on another alleged White House scandal, but few in the news media seem to be listening.



According to General William Shelton, the commanding officer of U.S. Air Force's space command, he was told to alter his testimony before the House of Representatives' Subcommittee on Strategic Forces regarding an Obama White House attempt to award a defense contract to the Lightsquared firm.



Lightsquared is a high-tech company doing business in Virginia that's owned by billionaire Philip Falcone, an Obama friend and campaign contributor.





According to the National Legal and Policy Center, Phil Falcone had visited the White House and made large cash contributions to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Soon after, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) granted his LightSquared a highly unusual waiver that allows the company to build out a national 4G wireless network on the cheap.




Republican lawmakers say that after Falcon's visit, the Obama White House allegedly tried to push through a Lightsquared's proposed wireless network regardless of the objections emanating from military commanders who believed the project could disrupt key U.S. satellite systems.





At a hearing on Thursday, lawmakers on strategic forces subcommittee, especially the Republican chairman, Michael Turner, requested that the House Oversight Committee investigate if Falcone's company garnered any type of special treatment from the White House or from Obama appointees.

The hearing came after a report by a blogger on a news and commentary web site alleged that the Obama White House pressed General Shelton to downplay his concerns about the proposed Lightsquared system.



"Under extremely unusual circumstances, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently granted a company called LightSquared the right to use wireless spectrum to build out a national 4G wireless network. LightSquared will get the spectrum for a song, while its competitors have to spend billions," according to NLPC's Ken Boehm.



President Obama's underlings deny any wrongdoing, and officials at Lightsquared denied the charges that it is receiving preferential treatment from President Obama or his staff.

Republican staff members on the subcommittee say that the decorated General Shelton told the lawmakers that Obama administration officials urged the general to describe Lightsquared's system favorably during his congressional testimony.

During the hearing, General Shelton told committee members that the wireless broadband network manufactured by Lightsquared would have a negative impact on the current Global Positioning System (GPS) relied on by both the U.S. military and private sector users of the GPS.

General Shelton told the committee members: Tests with Defense Department experts, civilian agencies and others "indicate the LightSquared terrestrial network operating in the originally proposed manner poses significant challenges for almost all GPS users."

The general insisted through his spokesperson on Friday that he had not "watered down his testimony due to alleged White House pressure."

According to a source familiar with the Lightsquared probe, many officers at the Pentagon are highly suspicious of the President, the White House staff and even Obama's appointees at the Defense Department.

Another occurrence being probed is that the allegation that Lightsquared at first offered to sell satellite phones on its network, however the Federal Communications Commission allegedly issued a special waiver to the firm thus allowing sell terrestrial-based wireless service to other companies.

Department of Defense officials. such as General Shelton, in the past have raised concerns about interference with GPS users, and the FCC would then promise to disallow a firm to begin operating their network until after intense testing is carried out to ensure there is no disruption to satellite navigation.

The head of the FCC declined to appear before the committee on Thursday, which the chairman, Turner, called an "affront" to the panel.

Meanwhile, Falcone and Lightsquared executives are taking the offensive by giving Obama-friendly journalists at Politico exclusive interviews.

LightSquared CEO. Sanjiv Ahuja, and its billionaire backer, Phil Falcone, denied all allegations that the wireless company used its political pull with the Obama administration to secure approval of its business plans with the Defense Department.

“It’s just very disappointing that people are not seeing the facts here, and [that] this has become a real political issue,” Falcone, a senior executive at the hedge fund firm Harbinger Capital, said during his Politico interview. “It’s not a function of being a Democrat or a Republican, it’s about trying to be an innovator. … It’s very disappointing and frustrating that we are getting stonewalled like this. … I kinda scratch my head every single day and say I can’t believe this is happening.”

Falcone and Ahuja denied receiving special treatment from the White House or the FCC in their ongoing quest to become the nation’s first wholesale wireless broadband provider, according to Politico.

But some observers see things differently. Mike Baker, a political strategist and a former military officer, believes that this investigation needs to be taken to wherever or whomever it leads. He's like to see a special prosecutor appointed.

"This is a very important national security issue, not some politically-motivated witch hunt like the Valerie Plame-CIA case. But we all know that with the news media protecting this president, the chances of anything being done are slim or none," he quipped.

"First of all, we know what motivates politicians and big business. In the middle you have a career officer who is a four-star general. Whom would you believe? What's in it for General Shelton to make up stories?" Baker asks.

"Let's hope General Shelton sticks to his guns and that more Pentagon and Justice Department officials decide enough is enough from this administration," Baker added
In the era of Nixon this would have ended him. Our news media had integrity still, today it will be "investigated" behind closed doors and nothing will come of it.

It is too late to stop the train, 3 years ago it wasn't but people didn't wake up in time, we are lost now.
Holy crap, where did you come from?
I've been around. Spent the last year getting settled in the new house up in the hills near Spartanburg. I have been reading on and off over that time and alot over the last week. Hope you've been well Tarius, these are certainly interesting times we live in!  Bricks
Obama is one of the Antichrist and no one can bring him down.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/N...UTpXyy9KK0
SOS at CPAC: "Where's Admiral Gaouette?" and the "Benghazi CBA"
New organization of former US Special Ops officers issues distress calls about urgent high-profile questions.
By Mark Langfan, at CPAC
Quote:"SOS" is a naval emergency distress call meaning "Save our Ship", but at the CPAC, (Conservative Political Action Committee) convention, "SOS" stands for SpecialOperationsSpeaks.com, a new organization of former US Special Ops officers who are issuing distress calls about urgent high-profile questions, and critical  unanswered mysteries about the 2012 Obama Benghazi debacle.


CAPT Larry Bailey, USN (Ret.), a former senior SEAL commander and co-founder of Special Operation Speaks, demands to know, "Where the heck is Admiral Gaouette?" ADM Gaouette was the commander of the USS Stennis Carrier Strike Group on station in the Persian Gulf area who was mysteriously summarily stripped of his command during the attack in Benghazi, Libya, in which Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were murdered.

Several days afterward, it was reported that ADM Gaouette was summarily relieved of his command during a major operational contingency event during the Benghazi attacks for the alleged claim of "inappropriate leadership judgment." ADM Gaouette's detention and total disappearance weeks before the November 2012 presidential election was a story that CAPT Bailey says "disappeared into a black hole of silence."


CAPT Bailey, as a "Brother-in-the-Navy" of ADM Gaouette, has some urgent and vital questions:

Where is ADM Gaouette now, and where has he been for over 4 months?

Why hasn't Congress called ADM Gaouette to testify about the 2012 Benghazi fiasco, when he clearly was a key operational senior commander in-theater?

If ADM Gaouette is under some type of detention, what does "inappropriate leadership judgment" mean, what is he specifically charged with, and does he have proper legal counsel?


CAPT Bailey urges anyone who heard or saw anything, or has even the smallest most innocuous piece of the puzzle, to tell them what that piece is. He says, "The more questions SOS asks, the bigger the black hole of silence becomes."

Quote:Stay tuned; these soldier sailors have never left a man in the field, and they will never leave Admiral Gaouette in the field.  They see the Admiral as a "man down," and are doing everything they can to help a fellow sailor who may be in trouble.
:cheers2:
http://www.westernjournalism.com/benghaz...re-to-die/
Benghazi Whistle Blower: “… Americans Were Deliberately Left There To Die”

Quote:Two of my SEAL brothers (Doherty and Woods) were in Benghazi, working with the CIA on an intelligence mission to locate shoulder fired surface-to-air missiles that were stolen by Al Qaeda when Libya fell. They heard several shots being fired near the consulate. It was recorded that Ty radioed to inform his superiors and tell them what he was hearing and requested permission to assist at the consulate. However, they were told to “stand down!” An hour later, they called again to report the gunfire and requested to assist and were again told to “stand down!” WHY? And by whom? Only the President can give the order to military units to cross a country’s borders.

On or about midnight, while shooting in various areas was still going on, it was reported that Woods and Doherty called for any U.S. military support they could get because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house/annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound (which was verified by the radio recordings and by the drone that was flying overhead.) The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, it was reported that Doherty was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun killing several terrorists when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. Because they knew that there was a drone overhead, Woods had a laser on the mortar position for targeting. However, the drone was reported to be unarmed.




It was reported that both Woods and Doherty were killing every terrorist that appeared. Ty repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship that was in a neutral area. This is a C-130 aircraft that fires 20mm bullets (about the size of a man’s thumb) and 105 howitzer rounds at laser-illuminated targets. This aircraft is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The aircraft was told to “stand down”! WHY? And by whom? Again, only the President can give the order to military units to cross a country’s borders or not to.

It was learned that the fighting at the CIA annex alone went on for more than four hours; this was enough time for any planes based in Spain, Italy, or Djibouti to arrive and assist. However, two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait: a special Marine FAST unit and Delta Force operators. WHY? And by whom? Only the President can give the order to military units to cross a country’s borders. Why did the president NOT give the order?

It was learned through various witnesses that the end came when the terrorists fired mortar rounds that detonated on top of the annex. It is believed that Doherty was killed when the mortar exploded, and Ty Woods was mortally wounded. Woods bled out from his wounds for several hours after he was hit. This was reported by those who were sent in to recover the Ambassador’s body; and when they saw the type of wounds that Woods had received from the exploded mortar round and the amount of blood that he had lost, it was speculated that he had lived for perhaps 1 or 2 hours before he finally died from the loss of blood.

My sources are those who were attached to various support units (and who were in and around the area at the time); and I gave them my word that I would not publicize their names, as some are still on active duty. This is ONLY a small bit of the information that was notarized and sent to several representatives. Our team compiled 42 pages of information. When the entire report is read, one can ONLY conclude that these Americans were deliberately left there to die, due to the criminal negligence and inaction on behalf of Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Hillary ignored pleads for assistance in security to shut down the consulate, as it was becoming unsafe. Hilary also had a part in forging documents and openly lied about a movie being the cause of the attacks. Furthermore, she told the parents of Doherty and Woods that “They are going to prosecute those responsible for making the movie, which sparked the attacks.” WHY the lie about a movie?




Obama, as president, is the ONLY one who can give cross-border permission to any military command or unit to go into another country. Obama NEVER gave that permission. Obama also did NOT stay apprised of the situation when he was informed of the dangers in Benghazi. It is known that Obama was very ambiguous in his presidential responsibilities and told aides to (paraphrased) “do what they think is right.” Obama also lied to the American people about why the attack happened by blaming this event on a movie. WHY the lies? WHY did he NOT authorize the military rescue? WHY did he not get ALL Americans out of Benghazi the moment that he learned that Americans, especially one of his ambassadors, were in danger? What was to be gained by NOT taking ANY action and leaving Americans there to die? The president would have been hailed a hero for sending in a rescue team to save Americans, especially during an election. Yet he decided NOT to take ANY action and leave the next day for a fundraiser in Las Vegas! By not taking the appropriate military action to rescue Americans, President Obama is responsible for the deaths of four Americans! WHY did he NOT take action?





Billy Allmon is a retired Navy SEAL and honorably served his country from 1969 to 1993. He retired as a chief petty officer and is a combat veteran of three wars. While in the SEALs, Mr. Allmon participated in numerous covert and overt missions around the world in support of US and foreign governments, militaries, and other official agencies.



His new book, When the Bullet Hits Your Funny Bone: The Essence of a U.S. Navy SEAL, is a collection of stories about his time in the U. S. Navy SEALs and how they use their humor to cope with all the tragic events and horrific sights, which all Navy SEALs must deal with throughout their professional careers.



www.billyallmon.com

www.twilighttimesbooks.com


This article originally appeared at PPSimmons.com and is reprinted here with permission.


by Taboola
From the Web
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yr7odFUARg
Hillary Clinton Ad - 3 AM White House Ringing Phone

Karma.
Dance2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny3bOmey-BE
Quote:Published on Jan 23, 2013
Jan 23, 2013 outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. When pressed about the Administration's official "talking points" about the Benghazi Libya Consulate attack arising from a spontaneous demonstration - which the Administration maintained for weeks - she says "What difference does it make?". It matters because she lied about it.

Category
News & Politics
License
Standard YouTube License

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2013/05/06/...tand-down/
Quote:Benghazi whistleblower confirms: Special Forces told to ‘stand down’

May. 6, 2013 1:27pm
Meredith Jessup


According to the latest from CBS News, one of Wednesday’s testifying witnesses on the September 11 Benghazi terror attack will explain how a team of U.S. Special Forces was prepared to fly from Tripoli to Benghazi to fend off the attackers, but was expressly forbidden from doing under orders from the U.S. Special Operations Command South Africa.

The witness? Slain Ambassador Chris Stevens’ deputy, Gregory Hicks:


According to excerpts released Monday, Hicks told investigators that SOCAFRICA commander Lt. Col. Gibson and his team were on their way to board a C-130 from Tripoli for Benghazi prior to an attack on a second U.S. compound “when [Col. Gibson] got a phone call from SOCAFRICA which said, ‘you can’t go now, you don’t have the authority to go now.’ And so they missed the flight … They were told not to board the flight, so they missed it.” [...]


Hicks told congressional investigators that if the U.S. had quickly sent a military aircraft over Benghazi, it might have saved American lives. The U.S. Souda Bay Naval Base is an hour’s flight from Libya.


“I believe if we had been able to scramble a fighter or aircraft or two over Benghazi as quickly as possible after the attack commenced, I believe there would not have been a mortar attack on the annex in the morning because I believe the Libyans would have split. They would have been scared to death that we would have gotten a laser on them and killed them,” Hicks testified. Two Americans died in the morning mortar attack.

Hicks’ account of the ‘stand down’ order directly conflicts with the Obama administration’s official account of the events surrounding the attack and insistence that no U.S. military forces could reach Benghazi in time to act.

Read the released excerpts of Hicks’ interview with congressional investigators on the House Oversight Committee after the jump.

Via CBS:


Q: But do you think, you know, if an F-15, if the military had allowed a jet to go fly over, that it might have prevented [the second attack]?


A: Yeah, and if we had gotten clearance from the Libyan military for an American plane to fly over Libyan airspace. The Libyans that I talked to and the Libyans and other Americans who were involved in the war have told me also that Libyan revolutionaries were very cognizant of the impact that American and NATO airpower had with respect to their victory. They are under no illusions that American and NATO airpower won that war for them. And so, in my personal opinion, a fast-mover flying over Benghazi at some point, you know, as soon as possible might very well have prevented some of the bad things that happened that night.


Q : The theory being, the folks on the ground that are doing these — committing these terrorist attacks look up, see a heavy duty airplane above, and decide to hightail it?


A: I believe that if — I believe if we had been able to scramble a fighter or aircraft or two over Benghazi as quickly as possible after the attack commenced, I believe there would not have been a mortar attack on the annex in the morning because I believe the Libyans would have split. They would have been scared to death that we would have gotten a laser on them and killed them.


******


Q: I just wanted to ask, you mentioned permission from the Libyans. Why is that important? What did you mean by that?


A: Well, it’s their country. And for an American military aircraft to fly over their country, we have to have permission from them to do so.


Q: So what would have been the risk of — do you think it would have been risky for us to send someone, do you think it would have been counterproductive for us to send a fighter pilot plane over Benghazi without that permission?


A: We would have certainly wanted to obtain that permission. I believe we would have gotten it if we had asked. I believe that the Libyans were hoping that we were going to come bail them out of this mess. And, you know, they were as surprised as we were that American — the military forces that did arrive only arrived on the evening of September 12. Yeah.


******


Q: So, at this point [at approximately 10:00 pm in Tripoli], you are talking to Washington, you are talking to your RSO Martinec, you are talking to RAO. Are you talking to the Defense Attache?


A: The Defense Attache is there, and he is immediately on the phone to Ministry of Defense and to chief of staff of the Libyan Armed Forces. He also notifies Joint Staff and AFRICOM. Our SOCAFRICA lead, Lieutenant Colonel Gibson, connects with SOCAFRICA in Stuttgart, as well. And, obviously, RAO is also connected back home.


Q: Was there ever any thought at that time of the night to have an F-16, you know, fly over?


A: I called — when we knew that — I talked with the Defense Attache, Lt. Col. Keith Phillips, and I asked him, “Is there anything coming?” And he said that the nearest fighter planes were Aviano, that he had been told that it would take two to three hours to get them airborne, but that there were no tanker assets near enough to support a flight from Aviano.


******


A: And for the second time that night [Before 5:15 AM attack], I asked the Defense Attache, is there anything coming, is there anything out there to help our people from, you know, big military? And the answer, again, was the same as before.


Q: And what was that answer?

A: The answer was, it’s too far away, there are no tankers, there is nothing, there is nothing that could respond.


******


Q: So you had mentioned that the first team from Tripoli to Benghazi arrived at 1:15?


A: Right.


Q: And was there a second team that was organized? Could you tell us about the second team?


A: Right. The second team — the Defense Attache worked assiduously all night long to try to get the Libyan military to respond in some way. Early in the morning — sorry, after we were formally notified by the Prime Minister, who called me, that Chris had passed, the Libyan military agreed to fly their C-130 to Benghazi and carry additional personnel to Benghazi as reinforcements. Because we at that time — at that time, the third attack, the mortar attack at 5:15, had not yet occurred, if I remember correctly.


Q: So what time did the second rescue team ??


A: Well, again, they flew — I think that flight took off sometime between 6:00 and 6:30 a.m.


Q: At that point, you are the Chief of Mission?


A: Yeah, I’m Chief of Mission effective 3:00 a.m.


******


Q: Now, did any of the Special Forces folks, were they planning at any time to travel on that second aircraft?


A: On the second, on the C-130? Yes. We fully intended for those guys to go, because we had already essentially stripped ourselves of our security presence, or our security capability to the bare minimum …


******


A: So Lieutenant Colonel Gibson, who is the SOCAFRICA commander, his team, you know, they were on their way to the vehicles to go to the airport to get on the C-130 when he got a phone call from SOCAFRICA which said, you can’t go now, you don’t have authority to go now. And so they missed the flight. And, of course, this meant that one of the …


Q : They didn’t miss the flight. They were told not to board the flight.


A: They were told not to board the flight, so they missed it. So, anyway, and yeah. I still remember Colonel Gibson, he said, “I have never been so embarrassed in my life that a State Department officer has bigger balls than somebody in the military.” A nice compliment.


Q: Now, at this point, are you having communications with Washington?


A: I was in communications with Washington all night long. I was reporting all night long what was happening to Washington by telephone.


Q: When these Special Forces folks were told essentially to stand down, what was your next move? Did you have a recourse? Were you able to call Washington? Were you able to call anyone at this point to get that decision reversed?


A: No, because the flight was — the flight was leaving. And, you know, if they missed — you know, if the vehicles didn’t leave when they leave, they would miss the flight time at the airport. And the airport — you know, we were going all the way to Mitiga. The C-130 is at Mitiga, which is all the way on the other side of Tripoli.


Q: What was the rationale that you were given that they couldn’t go, ultimately?


A: I guess they just didn’t have the right authority from the right.
Quote:And he said that the nearest fighter planes were Aviano, that he had been told that it would take two to three hours to get them airborne, but that there were no tanker assets near enough to support a flight from Aviano.

Two to three hours would surely have been enough time for tankers to get down there from RAF Mildenhall . They supported F111s from Upper Heyford on the 1986 raid on Tripoli.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppa...der-sniper
Flashback 2008: Hillary Clinton Exposed for Lying About Being 'Under Sniper Fire' in Bosnia
Quote:For those with short memories:

In a speech on Iraq policy delivered Monday at George Washington University, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton recalled facing “sniper fire” on her 1996 trip to Bosnia to visit U.S. troops on a peacekeeping mission. But reporters traveling with the then-First Lady made no reference to any “sniper fire” at the time, and pictures of Clinton arriving at the main air base in Tuzla (see attached video) don’t show anyone ducking or covering
Under fire now Baby.
Dance2 Rofl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...DNjxRHOquA
Published on Sep 19, 2012 
Breaking: Benghazi Attack Video: NO DEMONSTRATIONS, NO GUARDS, JUST ATTACK SQUAD


Category
Nonprofits & Activism
License
Standard YouTube License

http://investmentwatchblog.com/obama-gav...tand-down/

****OBAMA GAVE THE STAND DOWN ORDER ON BENGHAZI****Rep. Ann Wagner states that the President of the United States gave the command to stand down

May 10th, 2013

Rep. Ann Wagner on The Dana Show 5-8-13
Rep. Ann Wagner states that the President of the United States is the one to give the command to stand down
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iABKTZvj-...r_embedded
Quote:OBAMA ORDERED “STAND DOWN”

“After Defense Secretary Leon Panetta made the following statement about not deploying troops without the intel that says its a good idea, career military people began talking. What they had to say suggests someone in Washington needs to be fired, and someone else needs to be impeached. The quote attributed to Panetta was: “…the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real-time information about taking place. And, as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”

However, when Gen. Carter Ham, head of Africom, received the same emails that Panetta, Clinton and Obama received, he assembled a rapid response unit and informed Panetta he was ready to go. Ham was ordered to stand down. He told Panetta to screw himself, telling the Secretary that he was sending his men in. Less than one minute later Lt. Gen. David Rodriquez told Ham—his boss—he had just been relieved of his command because he refused to obey a direct order from the Commander-in-Chief. Obama then appointed Rodriguez as the new head of Africom. Now you know precisely who gave the order to “stand down” that resulted in the sacrificial death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens, IT Specialist Sean Smith and former Navy Seals Glenn Doherty and Tyrone Woods for “political points.”

The Obama Administration also lied when it said that Doherty and Woods were assigned to personally protect Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi. That was a blatant fabrication. The former Seals, attached to the CIA, refused the White House order to “stand down.” They went to the Consulate and defended the mission with their lives.

http://newswithviews.com/Ryter/jon374.htm



How about Retired Army Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin—who is the former commander of the U.S. Special Forces Command, the former deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence and who, in the 1990s, worked with the CIA believes it is a reasonable supposition that the U.S. was supporting or planning to support the Syrian rebels via Benghazi, Libya.

Watch from about 1.45 in:
What do you bet
Dance2
Hillary won't fall any further on her sword
for obama
after all
she is
'America's" smartest woman
Dance2
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppa...z2T1d0flF5
Quote:"CBS News President David Rhodes and ABC News President Ben Sherwood, both of them have siblings that not only work at the White House, that not only work for President Obama, but they work at the NSC on foreign policy issues directly related to Benghazi."

So stated political consultant and media commentator Richard Grenell on Saturday's Fox News Watch (video follows with transcript and commentary):



RICHARD GRENELL: I think the media's becoming the story, let's face it. CBS News President David Rhodes and ABC News President Ben Sherwood, both of them have siblings that not only work at the White House, that not only work for President Obama, but they work at the NSC on foreign policy issues directly related to Benghazi. Let's call a spade a spade.

Let's also show you why CNN did not go very far in covering these hearings because the CNN deputy bureau chief, Virginia Moseley, is married to Hillary Clinton’s deputy, Tom Nides. It is time for the media to start asking questions why are they not covering this. It's a family matter for some of them.

JON SCOTT, HOST: So they don't want to bring embarrassment upon folks who, who they're close to?

GRENELL: Who directly are related to this story. Absolutely. They're covering for them. There's no question about it.

For the record, Ben Sherwood's sister, Dr. Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, is the Special Assistant to Barack Obama.

Virginia Moseley's husband, Tom Nides, is the Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources.


Story Continues Below Ad ?

Brucelee
Never believe anything until it's officially denied!

Quote:House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) told David Gregory Sunday that ”Hillary Clinton’s not a target” of his Benghazi investigation. Nor, Issa added, is President Obama.

Rofl

They mean to impeach Obama and destroy if not out right jail Clinton over this.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/348...ot-targets

Personally i wish they wouldn't, it will only make life worse on us ordinary people but we are not what the politicos on the DC mountain care about.
just depends on how far back
the Rats jumping ship go to?
at which point in the last decade?
could make a lot of People outside
look at inside Wash DC
a lot different.
Whistle
Nixon was a good thing to a Point
but still TPTB only grew more over Time.
Dunno
good thingy/bad thingy
Dunno
A lot of Truths have come out during last 10 years
who knows what may come out next?
Mellow
In fact
Rofl
Since We know Obama was being Brave while watching Osama on TV being kill and Bury at Sea a fine new Muslim Ceremony
Whistle
might be Fun
to see Film of What
Obama was Doing while the Ambassador
was being killed
Rover
Mean while
more scandals are breaking in the "main" st news
Obama & Jay are getting in deeper
the "FED" keeps pumping funny money into the stockmarket
as stockmarket goes to new highs
Dance2
Sun getting ready for Comet Ison
Dance2
what a fun year
cucumbers are in the garden
Rofl
http://twitchy.com/2013/05/13/it-gets-wo...ropublica/

Quote:John Podhoretz  @jpodhoretz 

Ah. IRS released confidential info on 12 groups to ProPublica last year. Conservative groups. Natch. http://www.propublica.org/article/irs-of...ntial-docs …
4:26 PM - 13 May 2013 

IRS Office That Targeted Tea Party Also Disclosed Confidential Docs... 

By Justin Elliott @elliottjustin

The IRS’s Cincinnati office last year sent ProPublica the unapproved applications for several conservative groups.
ProPublica @ProPublica 

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/jo...older.html
Quote:If the three-strikes rule were in effect, President Obama would be heading for the dugout, bat in hand. First the alleged Benghazi cover-up, then the kerfuffle about the I.R.S. targeting conservative groups, and now the revelation that earlier this year the Justice Department secretly seized two months of phone records involving editors and reporters at the Associated Press.

Among the many questions that the phone-records story raises are these two very basic ones: What were they thinking? And who, precisely, were they?


In scrubbing the Benghazi talking points of any mention of Al Qaeda-linked terrorists or prior warnings by the C.I.A., the Administration officials involved appear to have been guilty of trying to mislead the press and make their political bosses look better during an election campaign. If that were a capital offense, the Washington guillotine would be falling around the clock. The I.R.S. scandal is potentially more grave, but only if evidence is found linking the decision to investigate Tea Party groups to somebody in the Obama Administration, and if it turns out that the agency actually did something wrong. So far, such evidence is conspicuously lacking. As my colleague Jeffrey Toobin points out in today’s Daily Comment, what we have looks more like due diligence on the part of I.R.S. agents than a White House attempt to bully its opponents into submission.

In moderate and liberal circles, at least, the phone-records scandal, partly because it involves the dear old A.P. and partly because it raises anew the specter of Big Brother, may well present the most serious threat to Obama’s reputation. There’s nothing like an Administration allegedly trampling on the First Amendment to get the great and the good of American journalism all riled up, and the fact that it’s the Obama Administration makes it worse. On the watch of a Richard Nixon or a George W. Bush, such an outrage might be expected. But from the government of a high-minded former lecturer in constitutional law? Surely not.

At which juncture it’s worth pointing out that, as in Benghazi and I.R.S. scandals, no direct link to the President has yet been established. To the contrary: on Monday evening, Jay Carney, the White House spokesman, who is already under fire for his statements about Benghazi, insisted that his boss had nothing to do with the decisions to seek a subpoena and not to inform the A.P. until now. “Other than press reports, we have no knowledge of any attempt by the Justice Department to seek phone records of the A.P.,” Carney said, “We are not involved in decisions made in connection with criminal investigations.”

That statement points the finger directly at Eric Holder, the Attorney General, who last June assigned Ronald C. Machen, Jr., the D.A. for the district of Columbia, to investigate the leaking of the fact that, a month earlier, the C.I.A. had foiled a Yemen-based plot to bomb an American airliner. The A.P. broke that story, and Machen’s heavy-handed tactics appear to have been aimed at discovering the identity of the wire agency’s sources. At one point, the F.B.I. appears to have suspected somebody in the White House, possibly C.I.A. director John Brennan, who was then President Obama’s senior adviser on counterterrorism. During Brennan’s confirmation hearings earlier this year, he said that F.B.I. agents had questioned him about whether he was the source, which he denied.

Still, it seems highly unlikely that Machen acted entirely alone in seizing the records of at least twenty separate phone lines used by A.P. employees, including some home lines. The Justice Department has established guidelines for how prosecutors can obtain phone records from news organizations, and it’s hard to believe that Machen would have gone to a judge or a grand jury without first informing Holder and seeking his approval, as the guidelines direct. Some reports yesterday openly speculated that the Attorney General had signed off on the subpoena requests.

We will find out about that soon enough. But even if Carney’s firewall holds, and Holder says the responsibility stops with him, larger questions will remain about the Administration’s decision to pursue leakers in such an aggressive manner. After all, this is hardly a one-off case. During Obama’s first term, the government prosecuted no fewer than six officials for leaking unauthorized information, including Bradley Manning, the Army intelligence analyst who stands accused of handing vast amounts of classified information to Wikileaks; Thomas Drake, a former N.S.A. official; and John Kiriakou, a former C.I.A. officer. (Those cases are the subjects of pieces by my colleagues Jane Mayer and Steve Coll.) As Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee last year, “We have tried more leak cases—brought more leak cases during the course of this Administration than any other Administration.”

According to a detailed story in the Times last summer, this record didn’t reflect an active policy decision on the part of the White House, or even the Justice Department. “The crackdown has nothing to do with any directive from the president, even though he is now promoting his record as a political asset,” the story, which quoted numerous Administration officials, said. Rather, it resulted from a backlog of cases inherited from the Bush Administration, pressure from Congress to do something about leaks, and a push from the then Director of National Intelligence, Dennis C. Blair.

Even if that version of events is accurate, though, it doesn’t fully absolve Obama of responsibility—and neither does the argument that some of the Republicans who are now criticizing him on libertarian grounds are guilty of gross hypocrisy. Blair worked for the President; Holder still does. If Obama thought that the leaks investigations were getting out of hand, he could have done something about it internally and said something publicly. Instead, as the Times story noted, he exploited the record for political purposes during the election campaign.

When the news broke on Monday afternoon, the President was in New York attending a series of fund-raisers. Having earlier in the day made a pretty good fist of handling questions on Benghazi and the I.R.S., he may well have thought he’d fulfilled his scandal quotient for the day. That’s not how things turned out. And as with the Benghazi and I.R.S. sagas, this story still has a ways to run.

Above: Attorney General Eric Holder testifies in front of the House Appropriations Committee in April. Photograph by Win McNamee/Getty.

Dear CIC , Direction came from the Top down and guess where the Buck stops Obama.
:bellydance:
of course
obomberout wants the guns
Dance2
http://xrepublic.tv/node/3301
National Journal's Ron Fournier Obama's 'Chilling' Message To Whistleblowers: 'We're Watching You'
http://xrepublic.tv/node/3300
How the "recovery" is ripping you off
http://video.pbs.org/video/2323772697/
Constitution USA with Peter Sagal  Constitution USA with Peter Sagal
Host Peter Sagal travels across the country to find the U.S. Constitution.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/05/14/...free-fall/
Quote:US dictatorship and its free fall
Tue May 14, 2013 4:18AM GMT
By Gordon Duff

New information on the 2000 election, information now in the hands of top military officials in the US, conclusively proves that America’s government is in “free fall.””


In 2000, a criminal conspiracy overthrew the government of the United States through violence, threats of violence and massive fraud.


In light of what many believe to be the upcoming collapse, world war, economic meltdown, climate sabotage, global pandemics and radiation threats, key evidence has been brought forward.

The oft spoken of New World Order is now much more than conspiracy or myth. The United States is now and has been little more than a colony, to be bled dry.

It is now clearly recognized that this organization stands ready to destroy the last vestiges of human civilization in service of some indiscernible goal. Ascribing the term “reptilian” to these machinations is an insult to a viper.

Some Have Had “Enough”

In recognition of the current state of emergency, leaders of America’s military and intelligence community loyal to constitutional authority have taken exception with the continuity of governmental and command authority.

This is not a specific challenge to the Obama presidency but rather a clear recognition of the seizure of political authority in the US (and most other western nations) has ended all representative government.

By this standard, all governmental actions of the United States since that time will be “null and void.” However, the dead will still be dead, the maimed and despondent, countless in number, may look for what solace they can.

The old dialectic, “republic or democracy” is passé, much of the world exists under the slavery of a New World Order or is awaiting doom. Not all will pass into the darkness as sheep, as happened in America and her “allies.”

“The People against the New World Order”

Legally, George W. Bush was never the President of the United States, according to legal opinions now under broad acceptance with America’s top commanders.

Authorities now cite the election of former Vice President Al Gore. The same authorities demand both the restoration of the Gore presidency and the impeachment of Gore for failure to assume office though legally elected.

Records of Supreme Court deliberations during their bizarre move against the constitution in 2000 show that they were aware, not just of broad electronic vote rigging but that five court members were fully involved in a plot against the United States, knowingly complicit in a coup that involved broad threats of violence, blackmail and bribery on a massive scale.

New information on the 2000 election, information now in the hands of top military officials in the US, conclusively proves that America’s government is in “free fall.”

The evidence, leaked by top Pentagon commanders, tells a story now very easy to believe, a story of hate, of greed and, especially of brutal totalitarian intent.

Background

A group closely aligned with a “not so hidden” world government made up of financial criminals, oil and defense corporations, groups like the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission and Bilderbergers and extremist groups that penetrated all western military and intelligence commands exercised a violent overthrow of the government of the United States.

The operational planning group was the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), tasked with rigging the 2000 election, organizing the corporate media behind the coup.

As some may remember, the Supreme Court appointed George W. Bush as president, on a 5/4 vote on pure party lines. Retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, in recent public revelations has “strongly hinted” at the court’s legal misconduct in 2000.

Less publicly, secret deliberations, now in the hands of key leaders, penetrate the secrecy behind this critical time. The Supreme Court, led by a five-member cabal at the heart of the coup, knowingly abrogated state’s rights, separation of powers and equal protection provisions of the constitution to empower a criminal conspiracy intent on unleashing an American dictatorship on the world as a “super-cop.”

As early as 1999, PNAC had announced the need for “a new Pearl Harbor” to condition the American people to accept a consolidation of totalitarian authority and a permanent state of warfare.

The subsequent planning and execution of 9/11 was only one aspect of the broader plan; seizing the government, 9/11, suspending civil rights, rigging congressional districts, instill “true believers” in military and government and setting up a multi-national world government to manage a quasi-global slave state.

Experts in nearly every field all agree on one thing, collapse is imminent.

Correcting Course

Restoration of constitutional authority, the basis of all “oaths of allegiance” for those serving with the authority of “the republic” requires the restoration of said republic and its last elected president. Thus, Albert Gore is the last legally elected president and must, by law, fulfill his term of office.

Two branches of government are, technically, in rebellion against the United States.

The Supreme Court of the United States has strayed, an understatement of Olympic proportions.

Evidence of a conspiracy against the court to overthrow the government exists. Dissenting members of the court were subject to threats of violence against their persons and families as was President Gore.

This has been confirmed.

Subsequent acts of the court, the utter and absolute failure to uphold constitutional guarantees time and time again has been a travesty.

It has been treasonous, from Citizen’s United to the congressional redistricting which denied “equal protection and representation” to over 100 million Americans.

When the Supreme Court allowed suspension of habeas corpus, all semblance of representative government ended.

When they allowed murder, kidnapping and torture, ending all “due process,” they became war criminals.

The “Horrible House”

The US House of Representatives is now a tyranny controlled entirely by minority party under the control of criminal elements. Nearly half the members of the “majority party” would lose their seats but for bizarre gerrymandered districts, some geographies of phantasmagorical mien.

The 2012 Mob Ploy

During the 2012 election, drug cartel kingpin Mitt Romney received over $1 billion in “contributions,” much from narcotics, human trafficking and gambling backers.

Gambling boss, Sheldon Adelson spent $100 million, a number personal cited by President Obama.

Prior to the election, documents were released by sources within the FBI and Mexican intelligence agencies revealing that Mitt Romney, working closely with the Castro government and former members of Soviet intelligence services, managed hundreds of secret “slush fund” offshore accounts for key government and military leaders.

These accounts were funded through the generous contributions of the Mexican drug cartels and the CIA’s burgeoning narcotics operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

This relationship, which some believed began with Carlos Salinas and Mitt Romney at Harvard, actually began generations before. The Bush/Romney financial partnership, built, initially on profits from Nazi war industries, now dwarfs even the Rothschild cartel for “funds under management.”

DHS, Neither “Home” Nor “Secure”

The Department of Homeland Security is an Israeli controlled organization tasked by the New World Order to infect every aspect of American society in lieu of a declaration of full martial law.

The Wanta, Reagan, Mitterand Protocols

As things are now, only the “Wanta trillions” can save the United States from the grip of the New World “Dis-Order.”

Keeping America ignorant of the truth about the “protocols” is vital to those who continue to bleed America dry.

At one time, speaking of a “trillion dollars” was considered absurd. In recent years, despite obfuscation, psychological operations, disinformation, propaganda and simply corrupt news “Imagineering,” the public has learned that banks created “funny money,” amounting to what is now estimated to be $5 quadrillion dollars.

That would be 5 million billion dollars or 5,000 trillion dollars.

Don’t worry, none of it is real. We call this money “derivatives.” $10 trillion of the US national debt is money “invented” to keep foreign banks alive that got confused, they were no longer able to tell their real from their phony cash.

They were considered “too big to fail.”

The largest “poke” of real cash in the world is money accumulated by Ameritrust Corporation, solely controlled by Lee Wanta, former Reagan White House Intelligence Chief.

A trading platform for world currencies, including and especially the Soviet ruble, eventually yielded a very real $27 trillion, of which nearly one third belonged to Wanta personally.

The rest was to be used to finance the future of the United States as a debt free nation in perpetuity. That wouldn’t be allowed!

The Wanta cash is real. Most of the $27 trillion has long been distributed to Bush cronies, the international banking cartel that overthrew the US government and put “little Bush” in the oval office, much to the dismay of the human race.

Wanta sat in a Swiss dungeon as the Bush cartel plundered the birthright of the American people.

However, well over $7 trillion has been located and legally assigned for payment to Lee Wanta. Al Gore knows. The Pentagon knows.

The Bush family knows.

Federal courts have ordered the Department of Treasury and the Federal Reserve to remit the funds, now deposited with the International Monetary Fund.

Military leaders in the United States are hesitant to continue “sitting on their hands” with Wanta’s offer on the table, a massive pay-down of the national debt and broad private financing of massive public works projects in the United States.

The Ticking Clock

There is a war within our own government and military. The forces that would ask President Obama to step down from office voluntarily on constitutional grounds are, oddly enough, closely aligned with Secretary of Defense Hagel and Chairman of the JCOS, General Martin Dempsey.

They are, in fact, Obama supporters.

Against them are the very real forces of darkness, that “vast conspiracy” spoken of so many years ago by First Lady Hillary Clinton.

The “grand conspiracy,” the New World Order, is playing a new game, inventing wild conspiracies over Benghazi, a wild narrative of conjecture and fabrication intended to ensnare those who are stupid enough to accept “facts” from corporate controlled media.

While this dance continues, America is either being dragged into world war over Syria or, through failure to show leadership, will be supplanted throughout the Middle East and Central Asia by Russia and China.

America is, it seems, addicted to its own lies.

While the clock is ticking, maybe ticking away America’s final hours, will oaths be kept, will courage take hold, will bold and daring action confront the monster that has been feeding off so many of us for so long?

GD/HSN
http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/13...n-scandals
Quote:A day after criticizing the IRS over the targeting of Tea Party groups, Jon Stewart, host of The Daily Show, slammed President Barack Obama and the White House for not knowing about the scandals that have recently plagued the administration.

He showed that President Obama’s said that he’d heard about the IRS scandal through news reports, rather than hearing about it from officials in the agency. That, by the way, is odd since President Obama’s Press Secretary Jay Carney said yesterday that White House lawyers knew about the investigation into the allegations in April.

Stewart showed that this is actually a pattern when it comes to stories that reflect badly on President Obama and leadership failures, noting that the same line was given in response to Operation Fast and Furious. “You know,” said Stewart, “I wouldn’t be surprised if President Obama learned Osama bin Laden had been killed when he saw himself announcing it on television!”

Check out the segment below:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/irs-exec-g...le/2529759
Quote:Lois Lerner, the senior executive in charge of the IRS tax exemption department and the federal employee at the center of the exploding scandal over the IRS targeting of conservative, evangelical and pro-Israel non-profits, was given $42,531 in bonuses between 2009 and 2011.

That figure was included in data provided by the IRS in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by The Washington Examiner. Lerner is director of the IRS exempt organizations division, which processes and approves or denies applications from groups seeking tax-exempt status.

Lerner received $17,220 for 2010, $14,691 for 2011 and $10,620 for 2012, the most recent year for which the IRS said data was available.

Her annual salary in 2009 and 2010 was $172,200, and $177,000 in 2011 and 2012. With the bonuses, Lerner was paid a total of $740,931 for the four-year period
http://www.politisite.com/2013/01/17/ret...ZVPRJ3nbIW
Quote:The story as it truly unfolded

According to a report from the Washington Times, retired 4 Star Admiral James Lyons reveals the entire plot that led to the deaths of Americans in Libya that could have been prevented, who gave the orders, and why events took place as they tragically did. Admiral James Lyons is probably the highest ranking figure ever to intervene in a federal government criminal case, and testify. Thanks to this man’s dedication to his country and the truth, we will finally know the truth and who was responsible.

In his words Lyons says that the attack on Benghazi was a bungled kidnapping attempt to be perpetrated upon Ambassador Stevens. This was to appear to be a hostage exchange for a terrorist prisoner who was to be released in trade for a supposedly captured US ambassador. The trade would have been for Omar Abdel Rahman an international prisoner, known as the Blind Sheikh.

This apparent abduction by terrorists of our ambassador and then negotiated trade for the Blind Sheikh would have been the “October Surprise” that would have elevated President Obama’s flagging popularity and boosted his approval ratings for a re-election. A dramatic prisoner exchange that saved our ambassador’s life However, something went horribly wrong. A cunning and illegal bit of treachery by the Obama White House turned into something entirely different. Obama’s October surprise turned into a carnage orchestrated by the White House itself as the President, Leon Panetta, and CIA Director, David Petraeus watched via a UAV real-time feed as a 7 hour attack on the Benghazi Embassy raged. Reportedly, stand down orders were given several times to different units within striking distance.

A plot of pure deception

With what should have been only a staged kidnapping of Ambassador J. Christian Stevens, instead, Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty refused a stand down order and began doing their job of protecting the ambassador using force. Immediately the well-trained Seals began inflicting heavy casualties upon the terrorists who thought they were merely in a cake walk to abduct Ambassador Stevens without mishap. As a result of the plan going awry, a massive attack arose from the anger of the terrorists who felt they had been betrayed by President Obama. In the aftermath of the battle which saw Navy Seal Glen Doherty was killed after the embassy had been overrun along with the ambassador’s staff. Ambassador Steven’s whose body showed up 5 hours later at a Benghazi hospital supposedly overcome by smoke as the initial press reports indicated was, in fact, raped, tortured, and dragged around Benghazi in retaliation for the botched Obama White House plan.

Obama hands over Libya to Al Qaeda

Was this just a freak occurrence that belies the true nature of dealings in Libya with American diplomatic efforts, just one glitch in normal standard operating procedure? No, according to former Admiral Lyons and many others such as Glen Beck, who have all uncovered evidence that lead to much more sinister deeds being undertaken. Evidence of a working relationship between the US and its alleged terrorist enemies had already delivered Libya to the Al Qaeda terrorist organization through infiltration of the government, media, and general society prior to the rebellion against Muammar Gaddafi that toppled the dictator last year. That the US has worked with Al Qaeda awarding them security contracts for all US embassies and consulates as well as border protection has instead allowed Libya to become a haven for numerous terrorist operators who have automatic access to Libya’s territory to carry out their training. All this with the support and blessing of the Obama administration. This is not only unthinkable, but beyond excuse or rationalization. There should already be indictments for many in the state department, in the DOJ, all the way up to the oval office, yet, so far nothing has been done.

Treason plain and simple

It goes even farther than that. Evidence indicates that Ambassador Stevens was being used as an arms dealer to supply Jihadists in the region to support yet another uprising in Syria. Just prior to the murder of our ambassador, he was trying to locate guns that had been walked across Libya’s border to other countries just as the ATF had done in operation Fast and Furious on the border of Mexico. These are not the actions of inexperience or bad intelligence. They are the actions of traitorous intention. President Obama will, no doubt, be linked to these deaths and operations if Congress will only act, and do its duty in prosecuting a treasonous president who is endangering national security.

There is no where else for a Congressional investigation to turn other than naming the conspirators, determining when officials knew, and assembling the evidence that murder was committed on behalf of the White House to silence those who knew and could testify. Through out the Obama presidency over the last four years the administration has master minded operations that have caused numerous controversies and crises.
Dear Mr. President

Grand Jury.

Thank You
Wook
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/bria...icizing-it
Senate Dems Have as Much to Explain as the IRS
Quote:Senate Dems Have as Much to Explain as the IRS


By Brian Walsh
May 14, 2013 RSS Feed Print Comment (56)

With Washington gripped by a trio of exploding scandals this week – from Benghazi to government spying on news outlets to thug tactics by the Internal Revenue Service – Senate Democrats seem to be hoping that if they just yell loud enough then voters will overlook a key role they played in at least one of them.


[Check out editorial cartoons about President Obama.]

They quickly sensed the political toxicity associated with Friday's admission by the IRS that they selectively targeted conservative organizations for special government scrutiny, and so Democrats didn't waste any time springing into action. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus of Montana, for example, vowed congressional hearings and called the IRS actions "an outrageous abuse of power and a breach of the public's trust."

He was joined by a chorus of other Democrats including Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire who called it "completely unacceptable," Kay Hagan of North Carolina who called it "disturbing and troubling," and Mark Pryor of Arkansas who tweeted that he's "working to get to bottom of this so we can fire those responsible & ensure this never happens again."

[See a collection of political cartoons on the Democratic Party.]

Fortunately, voters won't need to look very far.The willful ignorance and revisionist history demonstrated by Senate Democrats on this issue has been breathtaking, even by Washington standards.



Over the last three years, Democratic senators repeatedly and publicly pressured the IRS to engage in the very activities that they are only now condemning today. At the same time, Republicans repeatedly and publicly warned against this abuse of government power and pointed to a series of red flags that strongly suggested conservative political organizations were being targeted by the IRS. Those warnings were deliberately ignored by the Obama administration and Democratic leaders in Congress.

As the New York Times reported back in 2010 :


With growing scrutiny of the role of tax-exempt groups in political campaigns, Congressional Republicans are pushing back against Democrats by warning about the possible misuse of the Internal Revenue Service to audit conservative groups….And the Republicans are also upset about an I.R.S. review requested by Senator Max Baucus, the Montana Democrat who leads the Finance Committee, into the political activities of tax-exempt groups. Such a review threatens to "chill the legitimate exercise of First Amendment rights," wrote two Republican senators, Orrin G. Hatch of Utah and Jon Kyl of Arizona, in a letter sent to the I.R.S. on Wednesday. ... Democrats dismissed the Republicans' complaints as groundless.

[See a collection of political cartoons on Congress.]

You read that correctly.

The same Democratic chairman of the Senate Finance Committee who this week is calling for hearings into IRS activities, specifically called on the IRS to engage in that very conduct back in 2010. And he wasn't the only one. Just last year, a group of seven Senate Democrats sent another letter to the IRS urging them to similarly investigate these outside political organizations.

As the New York Times also reported just one week before they sent this letter:


The Internal Revenue Service is caught in an election-year struggle between Democratic lawmakers pressing for a crackdown on nonprofit political groups and conservative organizations accusing the tax agency of conducting a politically charged witch hunt.

Voters in New Hampshire may be interested to learn that Jeanne Shaheen was among the signatories of that letter urging action by the IRS.

[Take the U.S. News Poll: Is Obama Right On the IRS Scandal and Benghazi?]

So lost amid the hubbub surrounding the news that the IRS engaged in McCarthyite tactics to target specific political groups, and their subsequent apology for those tactics, has been the fact that the lobbying campaign from Senate Democrats actually worked.

From Max Baucus to Chuck Schumer to Jeanne Shaheen, key Senate Democrats publicly pressured the IRS to target groups that held differing political views and who, in their view, had the temerity to engage in the political process. The IRS listened to them and acted. And other Democrat senators like Kay Hagan and Mark Pryor said and did nothing about it.

Perhaps their strategy of distraction may work in the short-term with a Washington press corps pulled in a multitude of different directions, but Senate Democrats have a serious political problem that will haunt them as they head into an already-difficult election cycle. When these Senate Finance Committee hearings come to pass it would be a remarkable act of bravery and candor for one of these IRS bureaucrats to appropriately ask Max Baucus and others why they're not sitting at the witness tables next to them, instead of continuing in their charade of faux outrage.

Because Senate Democrats today have just as much explaining to do as the IRS.
•Read Susan Milligan: The Cleveland Kidnapping and Media Coverage of Misogyny
•Read Peter Roff: Cleveland Kidnapping Shows More Must Be Done for Kidnapped Children
•Check out U.S. News Weekly, now available on iPad
Tags:Democratic Party,politics,Senate,IRS
http://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbasile...-syndrome/
Quote:Obama's Benghazi Scandal Leads To A Rise In 'Ben Affleck Syndrome'

Watching the Benghazi hearings last week, it was easy to understand why Americans feel more disconnected from the political process than ever before and trust in government is at near historic lows.  The Benghazi crisis is a watershed moment not just for the Obama Presidency but for America as well.  Every time an American feels like they’re being snowed by the political class and disengages from the process our nation is weakened and freedom is imperiled.  Ben Affleck Syndrome spreads.  It’s a crisis of trust that only engaged citizens can combat – but will they?

What anyone watching television on September 11th last year knew almost instinctively was that a terrorist attack was taking place on American diplomats on American soil in Libya.  Then we watched something more shocking unfold in the form of a cover-up by an Administration singularly focused on protecting its world view.  The Administration has thus far gone on to blame a YouTube video, the State Department, embassy officials, the CIA and the military for what was a blatant political maneuver during a reelection campaign.

Today, eight months later the Obama spin machine is out of control trying to defend the indefensible.  No matter what the White House’s line may be, they can’t escape the fact that they controlled the response to this incident.  That’s how communications works during a crisis of this magnitude.  I’ve worked at a national security agency.  Decision-making rises straight to the top.

Hillary Clinton was complicit, but not the architect of the scheme.  It was conceived by the only entity that legally, operationally and practically had the ability to make the decisions the so-called whistleblowers allege.  They all work at the White House.  More specifically, the President’s National Security Advisor and the White House political staff, with the full consent of the President. Clinton, Ambassador Susan Rice and countless other Democrat officials parroted the Administration’s line – even though it defied all logic.

The President is now left trying to explain away the abdication of his responsibility as Commander-in-Chief in favor of a course of action that reeks of self-serving political strategy. Keep in mind, nobody died during the Watergate break-in.  This is a big deal and another reason for folks to walk away from the system.

This all leads me to Ben Affleck Syndrome.  Last week, Reader’s Digest released its list of the 100 Most Trusted People in America.  Ben Affleck was number 45.  That’s right, Ben Affleck is, according to the poll, the 45th most trusted man in America.  Tom Hanks was #1. President Obama was more than half way down the list.  He should be grateful he made the list at all.

To be fair, the Readers’ Digest poll’s methodology is suspect. Figure there are some Nobel Prize winners on the list, and I can’t believe Americans know enough about them to rank them in the top 25, let alone the top 100.  Reading the list, it’s also clear that there is strong liberal bias.  The methodology isn’t the point.  It’s the fact that even with the deck stacked in his favor the President didn’t make the top 50% and no other elected official of either party even made the list.

We simply can’t afford to live in an America where the people we trust the most in public life are the ones who have little to no impact on our future.  We cannot thrive as a nation when, as Time Magazine discusses this week, we are growing a generation of “me, me, me.”

Trust is earned and it’s revocable.  Can someone earn your trust by appearing in good movies?  True, you are making a decision to pay for a ticket or download a movie, so you expect that you will receive a return on that in the form of some level of enjoyment.  But that’s it.  Actors read lines as part of invented scenes and scenarios designed and written by other people.  Sports figures can earn our respect and admiration for overcoming adversity, raw talent and tenacity, but what would suggest to anyone that Peyton Manning is someone whom you would personally trust?

Trust is about faith and faith is about choice.  It’s a choice we make over and over – everyday in fact – based on our belief that some person or institution will do something that has at its core our best interests or those of the people and things we care about.

For Americans to rank the President of the United States more than half way down this list is telling about our crisis of confidence in government.

Ben Affleck Syndrome speaks to the idea that in today’s America, we like and trust people who never have to make decisions affecting our lives.  We often like and trust the people who never take a stand or tell us no.  They are two dimensional.  They appear on a screen and say things we like.  When we are tired of them, we turn them off.

If 80% of this Reader’s Digest list disappeared from the face of the earth tomorrow, there would be little consequence to our families and our future.

Technology and mass communication have made our lives far more transactional than ever before.  But all this new access to information hasn’t increased our depth of understanding about how the world works. It hasn’t given us a sense of context. It’s made us gravitate toward perceived safer options for discussion, intellectual stimulation, information and entertainment.

Choice is a good thing, but we can’t allow ourselves to live in world where we customize our surroundings so much that we fail to realize or react to challenges that remain in our society.

Ben Affleck Syndrome presents a danger to our democracy, not only because it disconnects us from reality, but because it dulls our impulse to enact real change, fight injustice, protect freedom and be in control of our society.  It fosters an apathy that prevents people from reaching beyond their comfort zone.  It allows a crisis of trust to exist when it comes to government and fosters misplaced trust on flimsy personalities.

Challenging authority, throwing out a lazy incumbent politician, demanding answers from leadership and standing up for your rights are essential to democracy.  They are also uncomfortable positions to take.  People make decisions based on assumptions of risk and reward.  They are more pragmatic than idealistic and make their choices from the inside-out, first themselves, then their family or household, then community, then local area then the larger world.

It’s so much easier to turn off the hearing, not go to the town board meeting, ignore politics, disengage from government and go watch a movie.  That attitude will lead to injustice and servitude.

We all must work to combat Ben Affleck Syndrome.  The number of people who “think they’re all crooks” and “my vote doesn’t matter” is growing.  We have limited time to get outside our comfort zone, engage in a real debate, work to maintain our Republic and keep a firm grip on reality.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6