Tag Archives: Chris Stevens

Intelligence failures turn deadly thanks to political corruption

by Jim Emerson,  staff writer

On the morning of December 7, 1941 American forces were surprised by a sneak attack launched by the Imperial Japanese Navy. This attack killed 2,402 Americans. The attack was an attempt to shut down the U.S. Navy to prevent it from interfering with the Empire’s plan to invade South East Asia and Western held territories.  There were simultaneous Japanese attacks on the Philippine Islands and on British forces in Malaya, Singapore, and Hong Kong. This was, as President Franklin D. Roosevelt described it, “a date which will live in infamy.”

Historians have blamed this attack on the failure of America’s military intelligence apparatus. Military intelligence intercepted and decoded Japanese diplomatic communications that would have alerted decision makers before the sneak attack. The problem with good intelligence in the hands of military and civilian bureaucrats is that the reports often never make into the hands of the right people.

9-11
September 11, 2001 was a day of infamy for a newer generation of Americans. Over 3000 Americans. The 9-11 commission report identified as many as 10 missed opportunities to predict the attacks by the Bush and Clinton administrations. During the summer of 2001 there were a significant number of reports of al Qaida activity relating to possible strikes against the United States. The CIA and the FBI were reporting that al Qaida operatives were contemplating using airliners as flying bombs. Hindsight is an amazing thing, it can easily point to the facts after an event has taken place. But before the 9-11 date, time and targets were largely unknown.

The greatest obstacle to comprehensive intelligence gathering was a “Wall” blocking communications which had its roots in the first term of the Clinton administration.  Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick called for increased separation between intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, thereby halting all intelligence sharing.  Threat warning intelligence collection never got to the customer. Strangely enough, the leftist Democrat responsible for the whole mess was assigned to the 9-11 commission in order to blame others!

The biggest failure of 9-11 occurred when the FBI ignored its own agents warning about an investigation of suspected terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui. Moussaoui had been suspected of being involved in preparations for a suicide-hijacking and is often identified as the 20th hijacker.

Benghazi
What happens when political leadership willfully ignores intelligence? Why, Benghazi, of course. Intelligence analysts reported on a massive al-Qaida gathering near U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens’ residence. The terrorist rally called for followers to kill American diplomats. Acting according to this report and additional warnings, “...the State Department issued a travel advisory warning Americans against going to Libya in August 2012. Obama administration officials have long denied any warning before the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi attacks.” (1)

1. http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-viewpoint/111213-678928-three-key-reports-flagged-dangers-at-benghazi.htm

The “Phony” Scandal That Just Won’t Go Away

by Jim Emerson,  staff writer

In a speech before a group of low information acolytes Mr. Obama chastised Republicans for their “parade of distractions, political posturing and phony scandals”. The IRS, NSA, Fast and furious, press intimidation and that really, really pesky scandal that will not go away, the murder of four Americans in Benghazi. Mr. Obama, his Democrat toadies and especially Hillary Clinton don’t want the truth of the Benghazi affair to see the light of day. Before the dust could settle on the coffins of Ambassador Chris Stevens and the others killed on that day, the State Department had forced attack survivors to sign non-disclosure agreements. (1) People died in an event that Mr. Obama considers to be a “phony scandal.”

David Ubben

Fighting beside former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, Diplomatic Security agent David Ubben was one of the wounded to survive the Benghazi attacks. Mr. Ubben risked his life in an attempt to save Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith only to discover that Smith had died of smoke inhalation at his post. Mr. Ubben was wounded in the firefight with pro al-Qaeda militants during which the SEALs lost their lives. In a rare moment of gutsy journalism that Holders’ DOJ couldn’t stop, Fox news found David Ubben recovering from his wounds at the Walter Reed Medical center. He has undergone several surgeries to save his leg. (2) To the families of the Benghazi victims, David Ubben is a hero.

Congress

Not surprisingly, efforts by congressional investigators to interview Mr. Ubben have been rebuffed by Mr. Obama’s State Department. And after the Fox news interview I have to doubt the sincerity of House Republicans in their efforts to launch an investigation. The American people aren’t buying the bull being distributed by this White House and the apparatchiks of the lame stream media.  A hero is speaking to the press and all our Republican politicos can do is write letters and complain. At this rate Hillary Clinton will be elected President without any meaningful competition.

Sources:

1.    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/congressman-benghazi-survivors-forced-sign-non-disclosure-agreements_739975.html
2.    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/07/25/exclusive-benghazi-hero-wounded-in-action-identified-recovering-at-walter-reed/

Do Hillary’s emails make Guccifer a hacker or a hack?

by Jim Emerson,  staff writer

The latest target of the hacker known as “Guccifer” was former President Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal. Guccifer has targeted former President Bush and Colin Powell and now we are led to believe he is targeting democrats.

In the last few months Americans have seen that current and former government officials made frequent use of non-government email sites to conduct business outside of official channels. Though these email accounts are used to hide communications from Congress and the American people, they are principally used to hide correspondence from Freedom of Information Act scrutiny. Hillary was most likely communicating with Blumenthal in this way to create “talking points” to mislead the American public about the September 11 murders of the American Ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi. (1)

Guccifer allegedly hacked into Blumenthal’s AOL email account last week. The hacked emails that were published in the Russian Times (2) appear to be analyst summaries, opinions base on facts but which should nevertheless not be taken as gospel. They do however give the idea that the planned Benghazi attack was triggered by a YouTube video. The actual sources of this conclusion are unknown but were most likely from human source interviews, though they could be the opinions of the original author. Though the emails were sanitized versions of the original summaries, Hillary should have known better than to send even sanitized confidential reports by way of a public email account.  Either Hillary or Sid were extremely sloppy or they intended this correspondent to become public. If she decides to run in 2016 she can use these hacked emails to deflect public criticism of her actions regarding Benghazi. Of course, she could also claim they were fraudulent.

The bottom line is that these emails might have been deliberately fed to Gucciferin order to “verify” Hillary’s lie that the attacks at Benghazi were launched in response to a little known YouTube video. In this case, Guccifer is either a party hack or a tool. Hillary will undoubtedly refer to these leaked e-mails to silence her critics concerning the Benghazi murders. Don’t look for the Holder Justice department to do anything. There is no concrete proof that these emails are valid.

 

  1. 1.       http://rt.com/usa/clinton-emails-guccifer-benghazi-492/
  2. 2.       http://rt.com/usa/complete-emails-guccifer-clinton-554/
  3. 3.       http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/27/EPA-email-Scandal-worse-than-originally-thought
  4. 4.        

 

A “What difference, at this point, does it make?” update

by Emma Karlin, staff writer

For pure arrogance and quintessential liberal hubris it’s hard to beat Hillary Clinton’s “What difference, at this point, does it make?” When asked about how four innocent Americans died during the attack in Benghazi she cleverly gave the media a way to write her guilt away with that line. It was too bad that the timid Republicans were unable to muster the courage to turn the line around on her and ask: “If that is the case why do we do autopsies?” or “Why does the NTSB investigate airplane crashes if, at this point it makes no difference ?” “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Since the Republicans allowed this outrage to pass without challenge, it seems fitting to ask a few other questions that SHOULD matter but of course since asking them would embarrasses Democrats we never will.

Each should be read followed by “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Three more Americans were killed by Islamist murderers in Algeria:

The GDP fell to -.1%:

It will be $20,000 a year for Obamacare’s free medical coverage:

Pump prices are at their highest level on record for this time of year:

Chuck Hagel knows nothing about anything:

Bob Menendez sleeps with underage hookers in the Dominican Republic:

Kathleen Sebelius violated campaign finance laws:

Osama bin laden is dead but Al Qaeda isn’t:

Military women can’t do the same things military men can:

There are no women in Obama’s top ruling circle:

Obama has killed 175 children with drone strikes:

Democrats want to track guns but not voters:

Welfare cards are being used at strip clubs:

Abortions have reduced the number of Black people in America by 1/3:

Anti-gun Democrats send their children to school made safe by armed guards:

More Red States than Blue States run budget surpluses:

Black unemployment is double White unemployment:

Seven of ten Americans say we are on the wrong track:

What difference, at this point, do the answers to these questions make? Well actually a lot, but since these questions will never be asked, no difference at all.

 

A Benghazi-Algeria connection to free the Blind Sheik?

by Ron Reale,  staff writer

What if there was a plan afoot to return the Blind Sheik to his terrorist Islamist brethren?  A plan so outrageous might exist that no one would believe it, unless it was said to come from this administration. What if the Benghazi offices had no security because it was part of a plan to trade the “captured” American attache Chris Stevens for the convicted, unrepentant terrorist, (no, not Bill Ayers, the OTHER American hating terrorist).

What if that was why the military was told to stand down during the initial attacks? Suppose the only reason everyone was killed is because of the unexpected heroic efforts of two real American heroes, whose resistance was thought by the attackers to be a breach of the deal which was supposed to allow for the easy capture of the American diplomatic officials! The idea was to trade the terrorist sheik for the American Diplomats safe return to their families.

Now suppose Algeria is the second stage of this attempt by the terrorists to recover their brother terrorist. Except this time, the Islamists are acting unilaterally. After Benghazi, they feel they cannot trust any deal their Muslim connections in the American administration offer. The Blind Sheik is going home. Sooner or later. Obama and his Islamist handlers did not have the stones to make the case for his release directly to the American people. Instead, we will watch him struggle with this “terrible decision” to negotiate with the Islamists. In the end, Obama will release the Blind Sheik.

There are only two things wrong with this theory:

 1) While there is no evidence to prove or disprove it, any logical theory must be considered, and this is what I believe:

 2) No one would be surprised if it came from this administration.  Unfortunately, I don’t believe there will be any concessions towards the Americans in this crisis. I believe Obama will “lead from behind” while Americans die under the protection of his Islamist handlers.

 I pray I am wrong.