Showing posts with label al Qaeda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label al Qaeda. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

Susan Rice: When Obama repeatedly boasted about defeating al Qaeda...


...he didn’t mean all of al Qaeda.



In an interview with NBC's Matt Lauer, National Security Adviser Susan Rice was asked, "What happened to the days when the administration was able to say it felt confident that we had dealt a crippling blow to al Qaeda and Islamic militants?" Lauer also wondered about the President boasting that al Qaeda was "on the run" and "decimated" during the 2012 campaign.  Rice said the administration was only referring to its actions against "al Qaeda core" in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and that al Qaeda "has metastasized" "to places like the Arabian Peninsula, Yemen, parts of Africa, Somalia," Mali and Syria.

Glad she cleared that up... 




Monday, December 30, 2013

The New York Times' on Benghazi: A political whitewash & a pack of lies

When the New York Times published "A Deadly Mix in Benghazi" (by David D. Kirkpatric) this weekend, Obama Administration supporters -- particularly those backing former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton -- hailed the story as proof they had been right all along: the story said the deadly attack on the "embassy" in Libya was conducted by a group unconnected to al Qaeda, and that it was brought on by a YouTube video they felt slurred Islam.

From the NY Times - Esam Omran Al-Fetori/Reuters

Beginning late Saturday night and continuing on through Sunday's news chat shows, the Clintonistas/Democrats triumphantly paraded Kirkpatric's findings anywhere they could get an audience. It wasn't long, however, before those in the know (from the military, intelligence and diplomatic realms) started coming forward to counter the NYT's report. In short, they were seething with anger over what they perceived as a report that was not only wrong, but also was constructed to protect the legacy of President Obama...and, more importantly, shield Mrs. Clinton from a scandal that could derail her presidential aspirations.

What follows is a piece by Larry Johnson -- reprinted with permission from his fine blog, No Quarter. (Disclosure: Larry is a radio colleague.) He worked previously with the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism, is a recognized expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, crisis and risk management. 



Understanding the Attack in Benghazi and the NY Times Lie


By Larry Johnson on December 30, 2013 @ No Quarter
Hillary Clinton and her advocates in the media are busy trying to muddle what actually happened in Benghazi, including the decision at Hillary’s State Department to ignore warnings of a deteriorating security situation, and the failure of the Obama Administration to respond competently to the attack as it unfolded. So let’s get the record straight.
This was not an “intelligence” failure. The intelligence correctly noted a worsening threat. It was a policy and leadership failure. The ultimate responsibility for this belongs to Hillary Clinton and Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy. Unfortunately, the Accountability Review Board (which was chaired by Ambassador Thomas Pickering) was appointed by Hillary, supervised by Patrick Kennedy. Pickering and company decided to not interview Hillary Clinton as part of their bogus investigation. But they did affix blame on Ambassador Chris Stevens for not kicking Washington in the testicles for failing to respond to their repeated requests for more security:
2. Systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department (the “Department”) resulted in a Special Mission security posture that was inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place.
Security in Benghazi was not recognized and implemented as a “shared responsibility” by the bureaus in Washington charged with supporting the post, resulting in stove-piped discussions and decisions on policy and security. That said, Embassy Tripoli did not demonstrate strong and sustained advocacy with Washington for increased security for Special Mission Benghazi.
The short-term, transitory nature of Special Mission Benghazi’s staffing, with talented and committed, but relatively inexperienced, American personnel often on temporary assignments of 40 days or less, resulted in diminished institutional knowledge, continuity, and mission capacity.
This is the ultimate Washington move–blame the dead guy, who is unable to rebut the allegation, and exonerate the ones who ignored the actual requests for more security.
No one predicted the attack in Benghazi on 11 September 2012. But that’s not unusual. Most terrorist attacks that have occurred over the last 30 years have come without any specific advance warning.
The real problem for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama starts around 4pm Eastern Daylight Time in Washington, DC when the attack started on the so-called “US Consulate” in Benghazi. The facility was not a Consulate. It was a “special facility” and existed primarily to handle the intelligence operations being conducted from the CIA facility at the location now knows as, “The Annex.”
Once the attack started the Operations Center for Diplomatic Security was notified. In accordance with standard procedures for this kind of event, a NOIWON (National Operational Intelligence Watch Officer’s Network) was initiated. This means that the Ops Centers at the White House, the CIA, DOD, the FBI, Homeland Security, the NSA and the National Counter Terrorism Center were alerted. Normally, when those Centers are alerted they start contacting the relevant officers and officials in their organizations who have a need to know.
At State Department, the Ops Center was instructed to NOT NOTIFY the Office of the Coordinator for Counter Terrorism. The Senior CT official in charge of handling overseas responses to terrorist attacks found out about the assault when he received a phone call from military Special Operations personnel who, in response to this news, initiated planning, per standing orders, for a possible overseas contingency response. What does that mean in English? We alerted our shooters to stand by to pack their bags and prepare to move Libya to help rescue US personnel and stop the bad guys. However, they do not move without an order from the President. They can pack their bags, but will not board aircraft unless Barack Obama says go. Obama dithered.
Obama met with Secretary of Defense Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff around 5pm. The attack in Benghazi had been underway for almost an hour. More alarming was the news from the front–Ambassador Chris Stevens was missing. No one knew where he was. Was he kidnapped? Dead? In hiding? No one knew. That’s the critical point.
As someone who has been involved in the response to these kinds of incidents for 25 years, and my experience includes helping train special ops forces for responding to these kinds of incidents, what did not happen next is truly shocking. Normally, a Secure Video Telephone Conference would be convened. This is the CSG (aka: the Counter Terrorism Security Group). The CSG consists of representatives from the US national security community who are experts in terrorism and the possible responses/options that should be recommended to the President.
But this groups was not convened. The Department of State, and I’m talking Hillary Clinton and Pat Kennedy here, in coordination with the National Security Council, and this includes current CIA Director John Brennan, decided not to assemble the CSG because they did not want to admit that a terrorist attack was taking place on the anniversary of the 2001 attacks that devastated America.
I do not blame Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton for not having full info about what was happening in Benghazi. That is fog of war. That is normal. But they did know one critical, undeniable fact–AMBASSADOR CHRIS STEVENS WAS MISSING. And what did they do? NOTHING!!
No tasking of intelligence assets. No contingency planning for finding and rescuing Stevens. Nothing but Crickets. It is essential for the American public to understand that the machinery of Government dedicated to combating terrorism that normally would have been activated to start planning and gathering resources was frozen. This was a deliberate, conscious decision by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Instead, the response was handled piece meal. The US National Counter Terrorism force eventually was alerted and deployed, but they left late and arrived in the theater long after the attack had ceased.
One other important point to note. Once mortars were fired on the CIA Annex, it was clear, with no doubt, that this was a pre-planned, organized attack. A retired military officer at the Department of State, an individual with experience in training and employing mortar squads, knew immediately the implications of mortar fire on the CIA site. This was not a weapon of opportunity nor serendipity. It was pre-planned. The mortar is a crew served weapon and was “sighted” in on the CIA base. What does that mean? The terrorists who were firing the mortar had trained in advance to ensure they could fire the weapon a specific distance to hit the target.
And what did Hillary and Obama initially claim? That this was a spontaneous riot incited by an obscure anti-Muslim video. That was a lie. Knowledgeable, experienced military officers communicated the reality of the mortar fire to Secretary Clinton and to the White House. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton chose to ignore those informed briefings.
As the attack unfolded in Benghazi, no one in Washington or on the ground in Benghazi knew how long the attack would last. There was no prior warning that the assault would be confined to a set period of time. So why did Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton react so passively? That is the key question they have refused to answer.
They deliberately covered up what happened and embarked on a propaganda campaign to deceive the American people. Remember what Susan Rice told ABC’s Jake Tapper?
ABC’s “This Week”:
JAKE TAPPER: So, first of all, what is the latest you can tell us on who these attackers were at the embassy or at the consulate in Benghazi? We’re hearing that the Libyans have arrested people. They’re saying that some people involved were from outside the country, that there might have even been Al Qaeda ties. What’s the latest information?
MS. RICE: Well, Jake, first of all, it’s important to know that there’s an FBI investigation that has begun and will take some time to be completed. That will tell us with certainty what transpired.
But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.
We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to — or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in — in the wake of the revolution in Libya are — are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there.
This was not the result of fog of war. This was a lie. A deliberate deception.
If the American public could get access to the Top Secret briefings that were prepared for Senior Policymakers, including Obama, Clinton and Panetta, on the evening of September 11th regarding what was unfolding in Benghazi, they would be shocked by the clarity and specificity that was available early on. The people/group involved in the attack was quickly identified thanks to the work of one of the US intelligence agencies. As House Intel Committee Chairman noted on Fox News Sunday, an Al Qaeda affiliate was clearly identified as having a critical role in the attack.
It is essential to keep these facts in mind as the New York Times and other media outlets try to confuse and deceive the American public. What happened in Benghazi on the 11th of September 2012 was a premeditated terrorist attack against US citizens, who were denied requested security assistance by their Government, carried out by Islamic extremists affiliated with Al Qaeda. This is not a theory. This is a fact.


Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Where was he?

Where was President Obama as Americans waited for help in Benghazi?



"Brave men died last September...more than nine months later, the question remains unanswered: Where was the president?"

Read more here...















Thursday, June 9, 2011

On the next episode of "The Al Qaeda Office"

Chock full of nuts (and petty politics)...


"Worldwide terror network Al Qaeda is riddled with petty office politics, files taken from Osama Bin Laden's Pakistan compound reveal," according to an article in The Daily Mail. "A trove of material recovered from the terror lair shows senior Al Qaeda figures were caught up in back stabbing and one-upmanship akin to the erratic behaviour seen in an average episode of 'The Office.'"


Al Qaeda's cast of characters...

Just great -- all this time we were worried about an attack hatched by Michael Scott and Dwight Schrute...



Monday, May 2, 2011

Says it all...

The Pledge of Allegiance at Ground Zero after the announcement that terror leader Osama bin Laden was killed by U.S. forces...



Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Giving thanks...

...and getting an aggressive pat-down?



In preparation for Thanksgiving Day, many around the nation will be making their way to loved ones' homes, via - yes - "trains, planes and automobiles." And much like the hapless characters from the movie of the same name, starring Steve Martin and the late John Candy, holiday travelers will be facing all sorts of challenges.


Especially if they choose to fly.

By now, we've heard countless stories of invasive pat-downs, "porno scans" and other assaults on the dignity of the American flying public...all in an effort to quash terrorism!


Now, along with having to deal with TSA's play on the administration mantra, "Grope and Change," fliers - frequent and otherwise - now have to contend with a list of "no-nos." The list (supplied by The Folks Who Feel You Up), doesn't cover sharp objects, items that can be used to club people with, or anything remotely construed as a possible weapon.

Here's the TSA's list of "Foods That Don't Fly." (Man, I am so glad Uncle Al Qaeda won't be bringing his lousy cranberry sauce again this year!)

Traveling with Food or Gifts

How to Pack Food and Gift Items


When it comes to bringing items through checkpoints, we've seen just about everything. Traveling with food or gifts is an even bigger challenge. Everyone has favorite foods from home that they want to bring to holiday dinners, or items from their destination that they want to bring back home.
Not sure about what you can and can't bring through the checkpoint? Here's a list of liquid, aerosol and gel items that you should put in your checked bag, ship ahead, or leave at home.
  • Cranberry sauce

  • Cologne

  • Creamy dips and spreads

  • (cheeses, peanut butter, etc.)

  • Gift baskets with food items

  • (salsa, jams and salad dressings)

  • Gravy

  • Jams

  • Jellies

  • Lotions

  • Maple syrup
  • Oils and vinegars
  • Perfume
  • Salad dressing
  • Salsa
  • Sauces
  • Snowglobes
  • Soups
  • Wine, liquor and beer
Note: You can bring pies and cakes through the security checkpoint, but please be advised that they are subject to additional screening.
Remember! – do not wrap gifts you're taking on the plane. Security officers may have to unwrap gifts if they need to take a closer look. Please ship wrapped gifts ahead of time or wait until your destination to wrap them.

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

"We can absorb a terrorist attack"



Veteran journo Bob Woodward's latest book, "Obama's Wars," won't be released until Monday, but it's already raising eyebrows.

Among the revelations in the book (according to the Washington Post):

-- [President Barack] Obama told Woodward in the July interview that he didn't think about the Afghan war in the "classic" terms of the United States winning or losing. "I think about it more in terms of: Do you successfully prosecute a strategy that results in the country being stronger rather than weaker at the end?" he said.

-- The CIA created, controls and pays for a clandestine 3,000-man paramilitary army of local Afghans, known as Counterterrorism Pursuit Teams. Woodward describes these teams as elite, well-trained units that conduct highly sensitive covert operations into Pakistan as part of a stepped-up campaign against al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban havens there.

-- Obama has kept in place or expanded 14 intelligence orders, known as findings, issued by his predecessor, George W. Bush. The orders provide the legal basis for the CIA's worldwide covert operations.

-- A new capability developed by the National Security Agency has dramatically increased the speed at which intercepted communications can be turned around into useful information for intelligence analysts and covert operators. "They talk, we listen. They move, we observe. Given the opportunity, we react operationally," then-Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell explained to Obama at a briefing two days after he was elected president.

-- A classified exercise in May showed that the government was woefully unprepared to deal with a nuclear terrorist attack in the United States. The scenario involved the detonation of a small, crude nuclear weapon in Indianapolis and the simultaneous threat of a second blast in Los Angeles. Obama, in the interview with Woodward, called a nuclear attack here "a potential game changer." He said: "When I go down the list of things I have to worry about all the time, that is at the top, because that's one where you can't afford any mistakes."

-- Afghan President Hamid Karzai was diagnosed as manic depressive, according to U.S. intelligence reports. "He's on his meds, he's off his meds," Woodward quotes U.S. Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry as saying.

--By the end of the 2009 strategy review, Woodward reports, Obama concluded that no mission in Afghanistan could be successful without attacking the al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban havens operating with impunity in Pakistan's remote tribal regions. "We need to make clear to people that the cancer is in Pakistan," Obama is quoted as saying at an Oval Office meeting on Nov. 25, 2009. Creating a more secure Afghanistan is imperative, the president said, "so the cancer doesn't spread" there.

Bob Woodward...

The part that bringing the most attention/criticism has been this: "Woodward's book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, 'We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger.'"

So, is this about "acceptable losses" or is it justifiable pride in the nation's strength and resiliency? The biggest criticism against this line of thinking is that "the best defense is a good offense." Chiefly, there are those at the Pentagon, Langley, Foggy Bottom - heck, even in the administration - who think there is no such thing as "acceptable losses."

The quote does ring a familiar bell...


General "Buck" Turgidson: Mr. President, we are rapidly approaching a moment of truth both for ourselves as human beings and for the life of our nation. Now, truth is not always a pleasant thing. But it is necessary now to make a choice, to choose between two admittedly regrettable, but nevertheless *distinguishable*, postwar environments: one where you got twenty million people killed, and the other where you got a hundred and fifty million people killed.
President Merkin Muffley: You're talking about mass murder, General, not war!
General "Buck" Turgidson: Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks.

(via IMDB)

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Remembering...

...that horrible day.



I guess it was too much to hope for: “Obama Calls for Tolerance - President Obama, marking the ninth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks, says U.S. is at war with al Qaeda but 'never will be at war with Islam.'” (Wall Street Journal)...

Rather than shrink from our righteous anger (not to mention grief) and our responses to the attacks of 9/11, we should remember it.

Boldly.


Until this “war” with al Qaeda and its supporters/sympathizers is won – regardless of how long it takes – we should revisit that horrible day and recall that thousands of our innocent fellow countrymen were slaughtered that day by thugs who hope to impose their views and will on the rest of the world.

Rather than taking a day of remembrance and turning it into another “teachable moment,” our leaders should join each other, shoulder to shoulder, to proclaim that while we are divided on many political matters here at home, we stand together to remember what happened on 9/11 and pledge the battle to destroy the evildoers.


What should be on the mind – and lips – of everyone bearing witness to that day, is neatly encapsulated in this excerpt from the New York Post:

“Beyond mourning (Posted: 12:30 AM, September 11, 2010) - For the ninth time, Americans today will gather at Ground Zero, the Pentagon and a field in Shanksville, Pa., for the now familiar -- but achingly painful -- commemorations of 9/11.

The nation will mourn its loss -- nearly 3,000 innocent lives, snuffed out on a Tuesday morning that seems at once so long ago, and as if it were yesterday.

And America will commemorate the heroism of the first responders who unhesitatingly rushed to the maelstrom to do their jobs -- even at the cost of many of their own lives.

But it would be a mistake to sentimentalize what happened on that brilliantly sunlit late-summer morning -- just as it would be wrong to lose sight of the true nature of the event.

The attacks were acts of mass murder, committed to advance political goals that were -- and remain -- antithetical to civilization itself.

Lenin wrote that the purpose of terrorism is to terrorize, and he was right. In this case, the object was to weaken the will of the established order to resist murderous medievalists who meant to drag the West back to the 9th century.

Who still mean to.”

Let us not forget the firefighters, police and other first responders who – when the world was burning and falling around them – rushed into harm’s way to save as many civilians as possible.

Let us not forget the selfless people inside the towers, the Pentagon and on United Flight 93 who gave their lives so that others might live.

Let us not forget those who toiled on the Pile, in the Pit and throughout the Pentagon in the hours, days, weeks and months after the attacks to recover the living and the remains of the dead.

Let us not forget the countless thousands who offered assistance at the WTC, Pentagon and in Shanksville on 9/11 and in the days following.

Let us not forget our allies who reached out to us in our time of need.

Let us not forget those who survived and carry with them – forever – memories of that day and friends, colleagues and loved ones lost.

Let us not forget those who died at Ground Zero, at the Pentagon and on United Flight 93.

Let us not forget those left behind. Let us never forget those who, in the years since 9/11, have given their all in an effort to destroy al Qaeda and others who would do us harm.

September 11, 2001: We will always remember.


Add: By no means is the following list comprehensive. It is merely a suggested "reading list" -

Monday, May 31, 2010

Stories to watch this week...

Within just a matter of hours, peace erupted into all-out violence this weekend...a major catastrophe worsened...politics as usual continued to be "politics unusual." Here are a few of the top stories to watch this week:

Israeli Raid Complicates U.S. Ties and Push for Peace - The deadly operation on a flotilla trying to break a blockade of Gaza introduced a new strain into already tense relations between the United States and Israel. (NY Times) / Israel defends flotilla raid amid global furor - Soldiers came under attack on an aid boat, officials say. Activists say any skirmish was self-defense. (LA Times)


A video still from the Israeli raid on the Gaza supply flotilla...

IAEA: Iran has over 2 tons enriched uranium -2 bombs' worth… Iran has amassed more than two tons of enriched uranium, the International Atomic Energy Agency said Monday in a report that heightened Western concerns about the country preparing to produce a nuclear weapon. (Jerusalem Post)

BP Revised Permits Before Blast: A week before the Deepwater Horizon exploded, BP asked regulators to approve permits for three successive changes to its oil well over the course of 24 hours. (Wall Street Journal) / Best hope for Gulf two months away - Two relief wells being drilled diagonally into the gushing well offer the best chance of stopping the leak. Even then, the first tries probably won't work. (SF Chronicle)


The BP oil plumes now threatens vast, fragile underwater ecosystems...

Qaeda Aide Believed Dead: Al Qaeda's third in command, who played key roles in a recently foiled terrorist plot against the U.S. and the 2001 terrorist attacks, is believed to have been killed by a U.S. drone strike in Pakistan's tribal areas, potentially dealing a significant blow to the terrorist network. (Wall Street Journal)


Sheik Sa'id al-Masri, al Qaeda's chief operating officer, was "fired"...

“Spain next in line to collapse under weight of borrowing to pay for socialism.” (Yahoo! News via Fark.com)

In the California GOP governor’s race: Poizner, trailing, slams Whitman's 'obscene' spending (LA Times)

Ranking member on Judiciary considering options to probe Sestak offer details - Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said the "factual errors" blamed by the White House "could be not getting their stories right." (The Hill)

Home Sales Set to Plummet in Markets Hit Hard by Foreclosures. (Bloomberg)

Poll: California voters favor Arizona law. (LA Times via Don Surber)

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

War drums along the 38th...

BREAKING: From ABC News - "Obvious" North Korea Sank South Korean Ship - South Korean Officials Say North Korean Torpedo Hit Ship, Killed 46 Sailors: "A North Korean torpedo was responsible for the March 26 sinking of a South Korean navy ship and the deaths of 46 sailors aboard, South Korean officials said. Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan said today it was "obvious" that the North Koreans sank the Cheonan warship as it sailed near the disputed water between the two Koreas. (Developing…)

ADD BREAKING: [North Korea] accuses South Korea of worsening relations over warship sinking. (Developing…)

Since the cessation of hostilities on the Korean Peninsula officially ended in 1953, the communist government of Pyongyang has been nothing short of a cancer on the world, not to mention its own people.

Time and time again, whether it’s been the proliferation of nuclear weapons, sponsorship/support of terrorism, or numerous attacks on South Korea and its allies, North Korea has shown that it belongs in the Rogue Nations Hall of Fame.

Things are heating up again...


Just a little over a month ago, hours after North Korea threatened to attack South Korea and the United States with nukes, a South Korean Navy Pohang class corvette (The Cheonan), just off the demarcation line between the two Koreas, mysteriously sank.

Despite the south’s reluctance to point a finger, everyone had that same terrible feeling: North Korea must be to blame.

Investigators from South Korea, the U.S. and other countries immediately began investigating the incident. Any accusation leveled at the insane leadership of North Korea could result in a resumption of the war that never ended, and an incorrect accusation would only invite it.

But know we know.

Today in Seoul, South Korea will declare that North Korea was responsible for a torpedo attack on the warship (in South Korean waters). South Korea will formally blame North Korea for launching a torpedo that caused an explosion killing 46 sailors and ratcheting-up tensions “in one of the world's most perilous regions.”


Over at Commentary, Max Boot discusses “The Ongoing Korean War.”


If things go bad, the U.S. /ROK edge in technology might not be all that it’s hoped it will be. Earlier this year, North Korean hackers were thought to have stolen U.S. war plans to defend South Korea...


And while it seems ludicrous to even consider, a decision to not provide North Korea with World Cup soccer broadcasts could be a big straw on the camel’s back, “there are some concerns that bickering between Pyongyang and a South Korean broadcaster means North Korean fans might be left in the dark when the world's most-watched sports event begins June 11. 'Because of the strangled relationship between South and North Korea over the Cheonan incident, we have not seen any headway,' said Yang Chul-hoon, a senior executive at Seoul Broadcasting System, which holds the exclusive rights here for the games. Negotiations stalled when the North demanded that the South Korean broadcaster pay for numerous costs, including the right to cover crowd reactions in North Korea. Any broadcast arrangement must also need the approval of the South Korean government, which appears in no mood to cater to North Korean strongman Kim Jong Il. 'We cannot say whether we would approve it or not at this stage,' said Lee Jong-joo, a deputy spokeswoman for South Korea's Unification Ministry." (h/t: LA Times).



Iran continues to dominate the news as it works toward its first nuclear weapon. Al Qaeda (and other terrorist groups) continues to gain notice for their efforts to secure a bomb – dirty or otherwise. But North Korea poses an even greater danger: if it’s possible to have an even more unstable leadership, it does; it’s shown a willingness to attack military, political and civilian targets; and it has successfully created/detonated nuclear devices.

And let’s not forget, it also waged a war against the U.S. and its allies – a war that ended without capitulation and with plenty of talk (by North Korea) that it would one day finish what it started...

Thursday, February 18, 2010

“Victory has a thousand fathers”

Last week, Joe “Plugs” Biden appeared on CNN’s “Larry King Live” to talk about all of the wonderful things the administration is doing.

Among the accomplishments Plugs said Team Obama deserved credit for was…wait…wait…wait…Iraq! Yes, that dusty killing field that General David Petraeus & the Surge essentially cleaned out despite opposition from…wait…wait…wait…the Democrats.


Coupla great guys...

According to the LA Times, here’s what Joey Plugs had to say:

“I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government. I spent -- I've been there 17 times now. I go about every two months -- three months. I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society. It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences.”


Larry King in better days...

Pretty amazing. Especially since the previous administration handed the success to the current one on a silver platter (on the way out).

BTW, during the interview with The World’s Oldest Living Fossil, Biden did not elaborate on what all the administration's other "great achievements" were so far.


Joey Plugs visits Mesopotamia...

What’s really interesting, though, was what happened shortly thereafter when the White House Press Corpse called the administration on Plugs’ claim.


Telling it like it is...

The following is supplied by a source within the Press Room who asked to remain unidentified. (The “Robert” and “MR. GIBBS” is Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. The “Q” is an unidentified journalist in the Press Room.)

Q: Robert, the Vice President last night said that Iraq could end up being one of the President's great achievements. Given that the Vice President was in favor of a partial partition of the country and the President opposed the surge that helped stabilize it, how is that one of the President's great achievements?

MR. GIBBS: Well, putting what was broken back together and getting our troops home, which we intend to do in August of this year.

Q : But the Status of Forces Agreement to bring troops home was signed before the President took office.

MR. GIBBS: Something that -- something that I think the political pressure that the President, as a then-candidate, helped to bring about.

Look, I think that we will long debate Iraq. We will long debate whether at a very important moment in our efforts to root out terrorism particularly in Afghanistan and on that border region with Pakistan, whether we took our eye off the ball. I think historians will debate that long after we're gone. I think they will come likely to the conclusion that no single event took our eye off of what needed to be done in order to -- in order to occupy a country that, until we got there, didn’t have a single member of al Qaeda.

So, look, obviously -- look, the Vice President has been deeply involved in fixing the political process there so that elections can be held and so that our troops can come home as scheduled this summer.

Obviously.

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Dispatches from our foreign desks...


Our foreign desks...



Coulda, shoulda, woulda – at least one person in the administration is admitting there were failures.



Portrait of the terrorist as a young man...

There were signs.

They’re “shocked! Shocked, I tell you. Shocked.”

Oh, and the Saudis are pretty shocked, too.

So stop me if you heard this one before…an al Qaeda operative goes up to a guy at the airport and asks, “How do I blow up an airliner?” The guy at the ticket counter says, “Practice, practice, practice.”

The tools of his trade - the Crotch Bomber's undies...(photo: guardian.co.uk)

Thanks to the Crotch Bomber, it looks like those plans to empty out Gitmo just got a whole lot tougher.

“Hundreds of al-Qaeda militants are planning terror attacks from Yemen, the country’s Foreign Minister said today.” Oh, joy. (h/t: The Times Online)

Speaking of Yemen (and I was), it probably doesn’t have much longer.

Is the time of the Mullahs coming to an end? I’m glad to see the president finally said something about it.


This is what democracy looks like...

Talkin’ ‘bout a revolution? Let’s hope so.

Just in case anyone was wondering: yes, Iran is still looking to unload some raw U.

According to U.S. intelligence sources, “Time is running out in Afghanistan.”

The drug war in Mexico – it’s getting worse.


The body count in Mexico continues to climb...

Thank goodness we have Hugo Chavez to set us straight.

For those of you with Bliss Index™ secret decoder rings, here’s your bonus message: I had an exchange with an intelligence expert this evening regarding Yemen. His special bit of information – “Wait till the news comes out that Obama's White House was dragging its feet on authorizing action by [Joint Special Operations Command] in Yemen.” As he notes, “Should be fun.”


Yemen - the next rathole...