Fund Your Utopia Without Me.™

15 September 2012

It's 3 AM, The Phone Is Ringing, And No One In The Obama Administration Is Answering

M2RB:  The Clash

By order of the prophet
We ban that boogie sound
Degenerate the faithful
With that crazy Casbah sound
But the Bedouin they brought out
The electric camel drum
The local guitar picker
Got his guitar picking thumb
As soon as the sharif
Had cleared the square
They began to wail

 The sharif don't like it
Rockin' the Casbah
Rock the Casbah
The sharif don't like it
Rockin' the Casbah
Rock the Casbah

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

"when bush was presented with the memo “bin laden determined to strike in u.s.,” y’all know how he responded?"

- troll, 15 September 2012

Yes, he was at the Crawford White House. He went fishing after being told the “Bin Laden was determined to strike the US.”

Gee, who didn’t know that?  Osama only declared war on the US in 1996.

"So we tried to be quite aggressive with them [al Qaeda]. We got – well, Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we’d been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, ’cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn’t and that’s how he wound up in Afghanistan.”

- Bill Clinton, February 2002


Osama bin Laden’s name surfaces during the 1993 WTC investigation as a financier of the Office of Services. His name is also found on a list of individuals who was called from a safe house used by the conspirators. During the WTC bombing trial, bin Laden’s name appears on a list of unindicted co-conspirators.

So, did the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) tell us exactly where, how and when OBL was going to strike?  No.  Unlike the attack on the American Embassy in Cairo, were there any prior threats naming the specific target and method in newspapers or on websites?  No.  Unlike the attack in Benghazi, which was just the most recent of dozens, had there been any other prior threats made with specific targets named?

Should we have grounded all planes? All trains? Stopped work at all ports? Closed all malls, sporting events, and skyscrapers lest biological or chemical agents be introduced into the ventilation systems? Shut down all universities, governmental buildings, hospitals, factories and other structures with mass capacity?

Should we have closed down nuclear power plants, water processing plants, electrical facilities, and all other utilities? We probably should have shut down interstate commerce, the interstate highway system and banned all heavy trucks and SUVs, which could be used as car bombs.

It probably would have been prudent, since no specifics were given in the PDB, to order all Americans to bubblewrap their homes, drink only boiled water, eat only foods that they grow, remain indoors listening to Alex Jones after receiving a bevy of immunisations or just plain kill themselves.

After George Bush had issued all of those Executive Orders protecting Americans from every conceivable danger, he then could have sent Congress home, revoked habeas corpus as Abraham Lincoln did, declared martial law, and instituted laws like Woodrow Wilson did that criminalised criticism and protest of the government and its national security and defence actions, including making war. In fact, people making antiwar statements at their own dinner tables could be charged under the Espionage Act...just like during the Progressive administration of President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat. 
Maybe, he could have just rounded up all Muslims and sent them to internment camps like FDR did to Japanese-, German-, and Italian-Americans.

So, while we waited for Osama's "determined strike," we could have just destroyed our Constitution, civil liberties, civil society, and economy....thereby rendering any attack by al Qaeda unnecessary.

Yes, I'm sure that you would have applauded Shrub, if he had taken all of those actions on unactionable intelligence in a PDB.  Snarkfreakalicious! 

On the other hand:

1.  The State Department had to issue a waiver for the consulate in Benghazi because security failed to meet its own basic security standards and those set forth in Federal law.

2.  The Benghazi consulate had been bombed twice in the 5 months leading up to 09.11.12.

3.  Specific threats had been made against the ambassador, the consulate, and other assets in Benghazi.

4.   Increasing threats to and attacks on the Libyan nationals hired to provide security at the U.S. missions in Tripoli and Benghazi had been made during the 6 months prior to the attack.

On 10 June 2012, an assassination attempt had been made on the British ambassador, which led to the entire mission being abandoned.

6.  Diplomatic cables warned of security concerns in Benghazi and flatly said the consulate could not withstand a coordinated attack.

7.  The Red Cross had been attacked in May and al Qaeda had left threats there on the day of the attack mentioning the American consulate.

8.  On 22 June 2012, Ambassador Stevens warned State that extremist groups were carrying out terrorists attacks, making threats against Western targets, and he believed that he was a target.

9.  On 9 July 2012, Stevens requested at least 13 more security personnel.

On 21 July 2012, the private security contractor, Nordstrom, warned State to be on high alert for terrorist activity.  State refused to renew Nordstrom's contract on 5 Aug and replaced it with a Welsh group, Blue Mountain, which had little knowledge of the conditions in Libya and hired inexperienced locals for $4 an hour.

11.  On 2 August 2012, Stevens sent an urgent cable to Clinton requesting a “protective detail bodyguard.”

12. On 16 August 2012, the consulate security team leaves while sending a message directly to Clinton of the dire security situation.

13.  On 8 September 2012, Libyan officials in Benghazi warned both Ambassador Stevens and Secretary Clinton of a pending attack on the consulate.

14.  4 hours before he was killed, Stevens cabled Washington.  He told Hillary's office that there were at least 10 al Qaeda groups openly training in Benghazi and he/and the consulate were operating under extremis conditions.

15.  Sean Smith told his fellow gamers online hours before he died 'Hope I don't die.'  He told his mother less than an hour before he died that he had seen someone taking pictures, reported it, and asked for reinforcements. On numerous occasions, he told his mum that Ambassador Stevens, he and others had repeatedly for better security.

16.  It was the 11th anniversary of the original 9/11.

So, don't even try to make the two equivalent because they are not.

Some of us have said that the whole "Arab Spring" thing was no move toward democracy since Day One and was a fundamentalist Islamic movement in sheep's clothing being aided by Useful Infidels like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, Samantha Powers (Cass Sunstein's other half - better or worse?  You make the call), Medea Benjamin, Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dorhn, Cyntinfoilhat McKinney, William Kristol, and John McShame.  As Edmund Burke observed, you cannot have a democracy without first having a civil society.  Furthermore, democracy for democracy's sake is not always a good thing.  Adolf Hitler was democratically elected, so were Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama, for that matter.  None of us need ask how much Progressives, especially members of the LGBTQQIAAP community, liked "democracy in action" when a majority of Californians voted to amend their constitution to define the only type of marriage that would be allowed to be legally-recognised would be one existing between one man and one female.

Moreover, despite the protestations of the Muslim Brotherhood to the contrary, we said that they would run for office, they would win, secular, enlightened, small "l" liberals would be crushed, and women and those of other faiths would face a society more in tune with Saudi Arabia than a centre-right-conservative-but-open-and-tolerant, United States.  In all of this, we were proven absolutely correct to the ever-loving shame of the Progressives, academics, intellectuals, ruling class, and, most of all, the President of the United States, who once said:

Well, I truly believe that the day I’m inaugurated, not only does the country look at itself differently but the world looks at America differently. If I’m reaching out to the Muslim world they understand that I’ve lived in a Muslim country and I may be a Christian but I also understand their point of view… My sister is half Indonesian, I traveled there all the way through my college years and so I’m intimately concerned with what happens in these countries and the cultures and the perspectives these folks have. And those are powerful tools for us to be able to reach out to the world and when you combine that with my work on the Senate Forum Relations Committee on everything from nuclear proliferation to issues of genocide then I think that the world will have confidence that I am listening to them and that our future and our security is tied up with our ability to work with other countries in the world. That will ultimately make us safer, and that’s something that [the Bush] administration has failed to understand.

- Senator Barack Obama, 21 November 2007

How painful it must be for Teh Won and his sycophants to have their illusions and delusions shattered into a million, billion, trillion, little pieces!!!  They claimed that the Muslim World hated the United States because of Bush.  Their professed philosophy was "Remove Bush and, voil√†!, they will love us, really love us.  The Nobel Foundation will even award a Nobel Peace Prize to a man, who has served a mere 143 days in the United States Senate and a miniscule 8 months and 19 days in the White House, just for not being George W Bush and for having such potential!"

So, for those of us not residing in My Progressive Little Ponyland, we were unsurprised when then-candidate, now President of Egypt, Mohammed Morsi, said on 13 May 2012:

“The Qur'an is our constitution. Jihad is our path. And death for the sake of Allah is our most lofty aspiration...This nation will enjoy blessing and revival only through Islamic Shari'ah...I take an oath before Allah and before you all that regardless of the actual text of  [the constitution], Allah willing, the text will truly reflect Shari'ah.”


As one of his first international projects, newly-elected President Mohamed Morsi declared on 29 June 2012, that he will work to secure the release of the “Blind Sheikh” - Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was convicted of seditious conspiracy in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center attack that killed 6 and injured 1,042, accused of being the leader of Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (also known as "The Islamic Group" and a group, whose name has been used in connection with the attack on the American Embassy in Cairo in some circles), and is a militant Islamist movement in Egypt that is considered a terrorist organisation by the United States, and declared:

"The obligation of Allah is upon us to wage jihad for the sake of Allah. . . . We have to thoroughly demoralise the enemies of Allah by blowing up their towers that constitute the pillars of their civilisation . . . the high buildings of which they are so proud.”

I would say "Believe it or not...," but of course it is believable...  In addition to encouraging Morsi's rise, most incredibly, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are actually considering freeing Omar Abdel-Rahman, who is serving a life sentence in a Federal penitentiary in North Carolina.  They've gone so far as to allow one of the Blind Sheikh's top associates in the terrorist Gema'a al-Islamiyaa organisation, Noor Eldin, to enter into our country and discuss a pardon or commutation with subordinates of Obama and Clinton.
I would also ask, "Are they nucking futs?" if I didn't already know the answer.  Such a move would be an utter betrayal to this country, its Constitution, and to all peace-loving, law-abiding Americans.  It would also be the best evidence yet that this administration is nothing but a treasonous, criminal enterprise that has submitted itself and, acting on our behalf, US to the Muslim Brotherhood and its vanguard, i.e. to create a worldwide caliphate.  Go ahead.  Laugh.  Better yet, read the Bruthas' charter.

I just have one question for Obama, Clinton, and the rest of the appeasing Useful Infidels: 

How'd that whole 'OK, Herr Hitler, you can keep Austria and the Sudetenland as long as you promise not to invade anymore countries" work out for Poland, Luxembourg, Holland, Belgium, France, Greece, Britain, etc?

The idea that the Islamists will cease with their demands if we 1) ban all material and speech "offencive" to Islam; 2) ban all material and speech that hurts the feelings of Muslims; 3) behead all those associated with the "offencive" movie; 4) leave Iraq and Afghanistan; 5) abandon Israel; and 6) "Let there be light:  Blind Sheikh, go forth and enjoy your freedom in the sun!", then I am determined to out Sanger, Margaret Sanger.   All Useful Infidels should be forcibly sterilised.  They are simply too stupid to seed and multiply.

(Anyone, who has ever read my posts or articles on Carrie Buck and the ATROCIOUS policies of the Progressives concerning forced sterilisations knows that I'm being facetious here; however, Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson once said, "The Constitution is not a suicide pact."

If the Constitution is not a suicide pact, then "We, the 'Stupid, Racist, Sexist, Homophobic, Islamophobic, Xenophobic, Home-Schooled, Dirt-Eating, Snake-Handling, Sister-Marrying, Deer-Shooting, Squirrel-Eating, Hick-n-Hustering, Moonshine-Running, Meth-Cooking, One-Tooth-Brushing, Single-Hair Comb-Overing, Blue-Plate-'n-Light-Special-Luvin', Stand-At-Attention-WalMart-Shoppers-Shopping, Ignorant, Untravelled, Flag-Waving, Cry-In-Our-Beers-And-With-Lee-Greenwood, Teabag-Waving, Guns-n-Bibles-Bitter-Clinging' People" shouldn't commit to committing suicide with "They, the 'Nattering Nabobs of Newspeak and the oh so Smarty-Smart, Elite' People" either.

Seriously, here is an example of the thinking of a Useful Infidel:

"It's been well-documented that "muzzies" respect the West and the freedoms they enjoy."

- A Proud Progressive Woman

OK, Ms Virginia "You've Come A Long Way, Baby!" Slims, I'm sure that you'll love living amongst people that think like Sheikh Taj Din al-Hilali, Australia's Grand Mufti.  Here is the Mufti on women's liberation and the "freedoms they enjoy in the West":

"If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats (sexual predators) come and eat (rape her) it..whose fault is it - the cats or the uncovered meat? 

The uncovered meat (liberated, unaccompanied, Western-dressed woman) is the problem. 

If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab (veil), no problem would have occurred."

Sheikh Taj Din al-Hilali, 26 October 2006

So, you go ahead and run your Mediscare ads claiming that I would make Grandmum eat catfood because she had to spend her money on her prescriptions.  In response, I'll tell her that you pall around with people that think that she, her daughters, and granddaughters ARE Purina Fancy Feast.

As Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said -- most incorrectly on the facts in Buck v Bell -- "Three generations of imbeciles are enough."  Aren't three generations of Blame America Firsters and America Haters enough?  Do we really need any more...especially teaching your children?

(A semi ~~wink, wink~~ is in order here.  Part of me wants to invest millions in sterilisations or Planned Parenthood lifetime gift certificates; provided, they are used solely by white Progressives).
 As Byron York wrote, "looking at his time in office, Obama judges himself on what he believes is his ability to connect with the world.  'One of the proudest things of my three years in office is helping to restore a sense of respect for America around the world,' he told a star-studded fundraiser in Los Angeles last February.  'A belief that we are not just defined by the size of our military…but we’re also defined by our values, and our respect for rule of law, and our willingness to help countries in need.  We’ve got to preserve that, and we’ve got to build on that.'  Events in Egypt, Libya, and elsewhere are not cooperating with Obama’s vision.  Must be the movie."

This gets to the crux of the matter because it exposes the Obama's fatal conceit, his staggering ignorance, and his arrogance that surpasses the level of "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead."  First, it demonstrates his Messianic complex and shows that he actually believes that he is a figure of such historical importance that one word from him can still hearts, oceans, and ancient angers.  

Secondly, it illustrates nicely the fact that Obama has a very skewed view of what constitutes "American values."  The fact of the matter is that free speech is a fundamental American value.  Further, Americans value the Constitutional prohibition against the establishment of a religion and equal protection under the law for all.  How can he argue that he is in line with American values when he and his Secretary of State have promoted blasphemy laws.  As the Heritage Foundation noted:

"As recently as December 19, 2011, the U.S. voted for and was instrumental in passing ‘U.N. Resolution 16/18’ against ‘religious intolerance,’ ‘condemning the stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of people based on their religion.’ While this may sound innocuous, it was the latest incarnation of a highly controversial ‘anti-blasphemy’ resolution that has been pushed by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) at the United Nations since 1999. This concept of global “blasphemy laws,” to which the Obama Administration is very obviously not hostile, is a long-cherished goal of Islamic supremacists.  It is also Constitutional sacrilege."

He has asked Google to determine if the film that his administration claims is responsible for the Islamists Acting Like Islamists riots complies with the company's Terms of Use.  He has unleashed the Hounds from Hell on the ridiculous con-artist, who made the film.  He has, repeatedly, said that Americans harbour resentments against "people unlike them" while calling such people (typically Christians) bitter-clingers.  And, don't even get me started on the Jewish Janitor tax.  Has he ever condemned the attacks on the Mormon church by his fellow Progs following the Prop 8 vote?  If he believed in religious tolerance and free speech, then why has he treated the Catholic Church the way that he has, including lying to Cardinal Dolan?

If you think that I doth protest too much and need to adjust the frequency on my tinfoil hat, then BEHOLD:

When asked the simple question, “Will you tell us here today that this Administration’s Department of Justice will never entertain or advance a proposal that criminalises speech against any religion?” five times, President Obama's Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division, Thomas Perez, would NOT affirm the First Amendment right to criticise any and every religion.

Thirdly, I don't know how he can even talk about the "rule of law" with a straight face.  Fast & Furious?  Recess appointments when the Senate could not possibly be in recess pursuant to Article I, Section 9?  Backdoor amnesty after Congress defeated the DREAM Act?  Quashing criticism of one religion while allowing the trashing of others? 

Fourth, "helping other countries in need"?  What country in the history of the world has done more for mankind than the United States?  Don't you just love being lectured about being "your brother's keeper" by a man, whose on brother lives in a hut in a Kenyan slum and survives on less than a dollar a day?

Finally, "events in Egypt, Libya, and elsewhere are not cooperating with Obama’s vision....must be the movie" a/k/a as the Real Obama Doctrine - Blame Anyone or Anything But Me is the most frightening.  Back in September 2008, The New Yorker ran a profile of Obama that contained this stunning statement to his political director, Patrick Gaspard, at the beginning of the campaign: 

“I think that I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters.  I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m going to think I’m a better political director than my political director.”

Considering the staggering hubris displayed then, it was no surprise to read that Tommy Vietor, spokesman for the National Security Council,  in an attempt to explain why his boss has skipped more than half his daily intelligence meetings since taking office – including every day in the week leading up to the attacks on our diplomatic facilities in Egypt and Libya, said: 

"Obama doesn’t need briefers because he is just so much smarter than everyone else...Unlike your former boss [President Bush], he has it delivered to his residence in the morning and not briefed to him...[We take pride in the fact that Obama’s PDB is 'not briefed to him' because he is] 'among the most sophisticated consumers of intelligence on the planet.”

I'm sorry, but NO ONE PERSON so smart that he or she doesn't need to dialogue with the national security and defence teams.  Can anyone imagine Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, John F Kennedy, Winston Churchill or Ronald Reagan limiting himself to his own counsel during a war -- be it hot or cold?  Even if I were an Obama supporter, this Messianic complex and the echo chamber worshipers would trouble me greatly.  Besides, it would take a Herculean suspension of belief to think that Obama is the "among the most sophisticated consumers of intelligence on the planet."  As an example, I give you Michael Lewis' Vanity Fair profile, Obama's Way, of President Barack Obama:

"If you flipped over to the networks on March 7 you might have caught ABC White House correspondent Jake Tapper saying to your press secretary, Jay Carney, 'More than a thousand people have died, according to the United Nations. How many more people have to die before the United States decides, O.K., we’re going to take this one step of a no-fly zone?' ... By March 13, Qaddafi appeared to be roughly two weeks from getting to Ben­gha­zi.  At 4:10 p.m. on March 15 the White House held a meeting to discuss the issue. ...

'We knew that Qaddafi was moving on Benghazi, and that his history was such that he could carry out a threat to kill tens of thousands of people. We knew we didn’t have a lot of time—somewhere between two days and two weeks. We knew they were moving faster than we originally anticipated. We knew that Europe was proposing a no-fly zone.  We knew that a no-fly zone would not save the people of Ben­gha­zi. The no-fly zone was an expression of concern that didn’t real­ly do anything.

On March 15 the president had a typically full schedule....Twenty-five minutes after he’d given the world his March Madness tournament picks Obama walked down to the Situation Room.  In White House jargon this was a meeting of “the principals,” which is to say the big shots...Before big meetings the president is given a kind of road map, a list of who will be at the meeting and what they might be called on to contribute. The point of this particular meeting was for the people who knew something about Libya to describe what they thought Qad­da­fi might do, and then for the Pentagon to give the president his military options.

'The intelligence was very abstract,” says one witness. “Obama started asking questions about it. ‘What happens to the people in these cities when the cities fall? When you say Qaddafi takes a town, what happens?’” It didn’t take long to get the picture: if they did nothing they’d be looking at a horrific scenario, with tens and possibly hundreds of thousands of people slaughtered. (Qaddafi himself had given a speech on February 22, saying he planned to “cleanse Libya, house by house.”) The Pentagon then presented the president with two options: establish a no-fly zone or do nothing at all. The idea was that the people in the meeting would debate the merits of each, but Obama surprised the room by rejecting the premise of the meeting. “He instantly went off the road map,” recalls one eyewitness. “He asked, ‘Would a no-fly zone do anything to stop the scenario we just heard?’” After it became clear that it would not, Obama said, “I want to hear from some of the other folks in the room.”

The argument he had wanted to hear was the case for a more nuanced intervention—and a detailing of the more subtle costs to American interests of allowing the mass slaughter of Libyan civilians. His desire to hear the case raises the obvious question: Why didn’t he just make it himself? “It’s the Heisenberg principle,” he says. “Me asking the question changes the answer. And it also protects my decision-­making.

Public opinion at the fringes of the room, as it turned out, was different....They aren’t political people so much as Obama people. One was Ben Rhodes, who had been a struggling novelist when he went to work as a speechwriter back in 2007 on the first Obama campaign. Whatever Obama decided, Rhodes would have to write the speech explaining the decision, and he said in the meeting that he preferred to explain why the United States had prevented a massacre over why it hadn’t."

Correctly, Secretary of Defence Gates and Admiral Mullen didn’t see how core American security interests were at stake.  Obama's Chief of Staff, Bill Daley, thought that there was nothing but political downside to an intervention in Libya.  Joe Biden said the entire idea was "politically stupid."  Of course, as you know, Obama did go into Libya...without the consent of Congress or even approval of his senior advisers.  He did, however, have the full-throated support of a one-time struggling novelist and his current speechwriter.

I remember reading about the furore during Vietnam over the idea that the egghead academics were running the war from Washington.  I wonder what both sides would think of a President involving the world's only superpower in a military intervention on the basis of the emotional pleas of his speechwriter?



According to the Government Accountability Institute, which examined the President’s schedule from the day he took office until mid-June 2012 to see how often he attended his PDB — the meeting at which he is briefed on the most critical intelligence threats to the country — Obama attended his just 536 times in his first 1,225 days — or 43.8% of the time.  During 2011 and the first half of 2012, his attendance became even less frequent — falling to just over 38 percent. By contrast, Obama’s predecessor, George W Bush almost never missed his daily intelligence meeting. 

 The facts:

*  The PDB is a daily briefing with senior intelligence officials identifying for the president what the most critical threats are to our security.

*  Obama currently attends the meeting about 38% of the time.

*  Obama did not attend any of the PDBs in the week leading up to the attacks on the American Embassy in Cairo and the American Consulate in Benghazi.

*  Obama did not attend the PDB the day after the attacks on the American Embassy in Cairo and the American Consulate in Benghazi.

*  He plays a round of golf 30 days a year on average.

*  That means that for every 5 briefings he attends, he catches a round of golf

So glad his priorities are straight. 

What might Obama have learned had he and his staff met on a daily basis and he pushed them harder? 

*  On 4 September, all Egyptian security sectors received letters warning that Sinai- and Gaza-based Global Jihad cells were planning attacks on the American and Israel embassies in Cairo.

*   Egypt's General Intelligence Service warned that a jihadi group is planning to launch terrorist attacks against the US and Israeli embassies in Cairo, according to a report Tuesday by Egypt Independent, citing a secret letter obtained by Al-Masry Al-Youm.

*  On 8 September 2012,  the Egyptian website, El Fagr, posted a statement by Jihadi groups in Egypt, including Islamic Jihad, the Sunni Group, and Al Gamaa Al Islamiyya wherein they threatened to burn the U.S. Embassy in Cairo to the ground.

*  On 10 September 2012, Raymond Ibrahim at reported the threat and linked to the site.  He also translated the post from El Fagr:

“The group, which consists of many members from al-Qaeda, called [especially] for the quick release of the jihadi [mujahid] sheikh, Omar Abdul Rahman [the "Blind Sheikh"], whom they described as a scholar and jihadi who sacrificed his life for the Egyptian Umma, who was ignored by the Mubarak regime, and [President] Morsi is refusing to intervene on his behalf and release him, despite promising that he would. The Islamic Group has threatened to burn the U.S. Embassy in Cairo with those in it, and taking hostage those who remain [alive], unless the Blind Sheikh is immediately released.

Quoting senior diplomatic sources, TheIndependent, a liberal British broadsheet reported that, “the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted.  [Nonetheless] no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and ‘lockdown,’ under which movement is severely restricted.”  Maybe, if Obama had dialogued with his team, the one hand could have found out what the other hand knew...
The chaos in the Middle East was not caused by any film.  It is what it is and Obama and the Nattering Nabobs of Newspeak must stop screaming about mean-old-meanie Christian filmmakers, religious toleration, religion of peace, the Arab Spring, democracy in the Middle East, Obama's Magical Touch, the need to prosecute those that offend other people's feelings, the idea that the First Amendment might need to be "trimmed" because it is just too damn dangerous to have the "hate speech" of a 21st century people protected by an 18th law when it hurts the feelings of some misogynistic, homophobic, child-abusing, maniacal, homicidal, suicidal, totalitarian members of a 7th century death cult.   It's time to put away childish things, as Obama promised to do on 20 January 2009.  Grow up.  Take responsibility for your failures.  Quit lying.

As an old acquaintance, Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University and occasional talking head, remarked:

“The film was simply an act of free speech. The position of the United States should be clear. Violence was not caused by any film.  Free speech is not a characteristic of America. It defines being an American."

Turley and his friend, Inflatable Gumby, are both Progressives, but with a libertarian bent.  Turley would be one Prog that I'd alert of a pending disaster.  He's a smart, sensible biscuit although he'd have to learn to live without Inflatable Gumby given my limit of Prog Saves is 5.  Too bad that more Progs won't listen to him.  He is a fount of reason in a Prog world of agitprop.

History has proven time and time again that the freedom of man is most at risk in times of turmoil and as a result of their leaders' ineptitude.   As the British politician and journalist Daniel Hannan recently observed in his book The New Road to Serfdom, “most disastrous policies have been introduced at times of emergency.”  If we aren't careful, our First Amendment rights will be lost due to Obama's ignorance, incompetence, arrogance, appeasement, and fatal conceit.

Rock the Casbah - The Clash

Now the king told the boogie men
You have to let that raga drop
The oil down the desert way
Has been shakin' to the top
The sheik he drove his Cadillac
He went a' cruisin' down the ville
The muezzin was a' standing
On the radiator grille


The sharif don't like it
Rockin' the Casbah
Rock the Casbah
The sharif don't like it
Rockin' the Casbah
Rock the Casbah

By order of the prophet

We ban that boogie sound
Degenerate the faithful
With that crazy Casbah sound
But the Bedouin they brought out
The electric camel drum
The local guitar picker
Got his guitar picking thumb
As soon as the sharif
Had cleared the square
They began to wail


Now over at the temple

Oh! They really pack 'em in
The in crowd say it's cool
To dig this chanting thing
But as the wind changed direction
The temple band took five
The crowd caught a whiff
Of that crazy Casbah jive


The king called up his jet fighters

He said you better earn your pay
Drop your bombs between the minarets
Down the Casbah way

As soon as the sharif was

Chauffeured outta there
The jet pilots tuned to
The cockpit radio blare

As soon as the sharif was

Outta their hair
The jet pilots wailed


He thinks it's not kosher

Fundamentally he can't take it.
You know he really hates it.

1 comment:

Sophie Ro, PHUP said...

The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, especially the Salafists, had planned the protest on Cairo for weeks. The stated reason was simple: RELEASE THE BLIND SHEIKH.

I am not in the intelligence community nor employed by the government, BUT I KNEW ABOUT THE PROTEST BEFORE IT HAPPENED

The Saturday before the protest, 8 September 2012, the protest planners had aired a snippet of the video on a show hosted by Sheikh Khalid Abdallah, a firebrand extremist, on the Salafist television station Al-Nas, which is owned by a Saudi media group. Al-Nas has been regularly described as a channel known for ‘promoting religious or sectarian hatred.’ It was thusly labelled by the Mubarak government and was and has been described as such by governments, organisations, and those that cover Egyptian news for years.

EVEN THOUGH THIS ‘VILE, DESPICABLE, AND DISGUSTING’ VIDEO WAS AIRED ON SATURDAY, 8 SEPTEMBER 2012, THERE WERE NO PROTESTS OR OUTRAGES ON THAT DAY, SUNDAY, OR MONDAY. Just ‘coincidentally’ the crowd that was already planning on protesting at the American Embassy in Cairo on 11 September 2012 to demand the release of the Blind Sheikh ‘spontaneously protested’ and expressed their ‘outrage’ over the ‘youtube video’ ONLY on the day they were ALREADY planning a protest.

The Egyptian government was aware of the planned protest days before the video was ever aired on television and notified the US government.

The video NEVER had ANYTHING to do with what happened in Benghazi. Furthermore, it is a demonstrable LIE that there were ‘protests happening at American embassies and other installations over the youtube video’ on 11 September 2012. The protests that spread around the world did NOT happen until AFTER Benghazi took place and the US government set out to rend its garments over the constitutionally-protected speech of Nakoula Basseley Nakoula. Indeed, the administration sought its censorship and was denied. Then, it had Nakoula arrested in the middle of the night by 10 Federal agents, perp-walked, and thrown in solitary confinement in a Federal detention centre on a probation violation, without bail, where he would remain until his court date: THE DAY AFTER THE AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. He is still in jail.

I laid out all of this not long after Benghazi with the links where the information was available BEFORE 11 September 2012.