U.S. Hired Flashlights and Batons to Protect Ambassador Chris Stevens in Benghazi
However, information has come out that the State Department hired the British security firm Blue Mountain to handle the security at the Benghazi Consulate. The Blue Mountain security personnel assigned to the Consulate were well armed to repel all attacks with their flashlights and batons. Yep! That’s right. They had no other weapons with which to protect the Americans inside the Consulate compound.It has been learned that Blue Mountain hired around 20 locals to help screen visitors and with patrolling the grounds. The screening of the locals was minimal at best and most received very little training. They have also experienced a high turnover rate among the locals hired to help with security.
Back in April, one of the local hires that had been recently fired along with one still on Blue Mountain payroll were suspected of tossing a homemade bomb over the fence and into the Consulate grounds. They were both questioned and released and no charges have ever been filed.
In the past couple months the violence in and around Benghazi had been on the increase. Even though Muammar Gaddafi’s rule had ended the year before, there was still a great deal of political unrest in Libya. One would think that increased security measures would have been taken to match the increased threat risk of the area.
http://godfatherpolitics.com/7617/u-s-hired-flashlights-and-batons-to-protect-ambassador-chris-stevens-in-benghazi/
Roadmap For Monday’s Debate
By Dick MorrisThere is a temptation to get lost in the weeds of when Obama recognized that the Libya attack was, indeed, an act of terror. But the key point is that Obama treated the video as a provocation for the attack as if they had a moral equivalency. Otherwise, why constantly mention the video in the same breath as the attack?
Why run an ad apologizing for the video in Pakistan? Why address the video in his U.N. speech? It may be a bridge too far to convince people that Obama was engaged in a cover-up for political purposes trying to convince people there was no premeditated terror attack. But surely there is no good reason for lumping the attack and video together. It’s like saying “he murdered this guy but only after the guy called him a dirty word.”
But, beyond the specifics of Libya, a 2011 national survey by Pat Caddell and John McLaughlin provides the key lines of attack Romney should follow in the foreign policy debate coming up on Monday.
• Obama’s outreach to the Muslim world has decreased our national security. 30% believe it has increased our security and 47% feel it has decreased it. Romney should attack Obama for naïveté in his dealing with the Arab world and for not seizing and holding the moral high ground but instead seeking to understand the other guy and give him the benefit of the doubt.
• Romney should stress that Obama’s policy toward Iran will not stop it from developing nuclear weapons. By 77-10 voters agree that they will not stop Iran. Asked what he would do, he should say that he will support Israel if she has to take military action against Iran. He should say that he does not believe we need to commit US soldiers or aircraft but that we should provide Israel with the ordinance they need to destroy the Iranian missile sites. If Obama says this could lead to a general war, Romney should say that a strong posture does not cause wars, but a weak one does. He should say that if the US makes clear that it will help Israel if it comes down to that, then Iran will realize that it must curtail its weapons program. In the meantime, Romney should stress the need to support the democratic opposition to the Ayatollah. If it ultimately has to come down to a war, better now before they have nuclear weapons than after they get them.
• Romney should attack Obama for failing to discipline China. He needs to explain that we sell only $50 billion to China and buy $400 billion from them (check numbers). With the rest of the world, we hold our own in trade. That’s because of currency manipulation. Obama is frightened that China will stop lending us money. But he doesn’t understand that China lends us money because they have to. The buy dollars and sell Yuan to keep the Yuan weak so Chinese products are cheaper in the US. Then what are they going to do with all those dollars? Bet them in Vegas? They buy T bills with them. That’s all they can do and that’s how the lend us the money. If they stopped manipulating, we wouldn’t need their money because we’d have an even balance of trade with the. By 20-75 voters do not believe Obama has been tough enough with China and most see fear of their no longer lending us money is the reason.
• Romney should attack Obama’s advocacy of an 80% cut in our strategic arsenal with no reciprocal cuts from Russia or China. By 22-64 voters oppose Obama’s position.
• He should go after Obama for cutting American defense spending too much. By 32-58, voters believe the cuts are “way too deep.”
• Romney should press Obama about what he meant by giving him more space with Russia after the election. Most likely, he was referring to a commitment by us that we would not orbit anti-missile satellites, a key concession which would make Iran and North Korea even more dangerous.
• Romney should criticize Obama for equating Israel and the Palestinians as two morally equivalent sides of a dispute. He should say: “If the Arabs laid down their arms, there would be no war. If Israel laid down its arms, there would be no Israel.”
• Romney should attack Islamic fundamentalism for its attitude toward women and criticize Obama’s political correctness and refusal to face up to the threat it poses. He should, for example, criticize him for removing any references to Muslim extremism from FBI training manuals and his firing of good conscientious FBI agents for being Islamophobic.
These are the milestones to a successful debate.
http://www.dickmorris.com/roadmap-for-mondays-debate/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports
Where’s Liberal Outrage over Riot and Assassination Talk?
By Gary DeMar
Assassination talk is all around us, and the media are silent or dismissive on the subject. Once again the media double standard is in play. It’s like playing a game in the World Series where the umpires have two rule books, one for each team. An error is a hit for one team, and a hit is an error for the other team.
There’s even been talk about riots if Mitt Romney wins. Here are some examples as posted at InfoWars:
- “If obama dont get re-elected & romney wins .. on life every white persons getting pistol whipped and im startin a riot.” (SOURCE)
- “If Obama don’t win lets start a riot so Romney know what he’s getting himself into.” (SOURCE)
- “You know you ain’t shit if you gotta “MAKE” Mafukas vote for ROMNEY ! …. Mannnn OBAMA better get back in office. Or BLACK FOLKS will riot.” (SOURCE)
- “If Romney wins im goin on a rampage.” (SOURCE)
- “If Mitt Romney wins the election I think its our duties as Black folks to riot and f**k shit up.” (SOURCE)
- “If every action IS met with an equal and opposite reaction…what should workers do to employers if Romney’s elected? #Riot in the streets!!” (SOURCE)
- “I swear if Mitt Romney becomes president, I’m gonna be the one to assassinate his ass!!!” (SOURCE)
- “im telling you if romney gets elected somebody gon have to take a L and A. assassinate romney and ryan or B. obliterate the WH w/ them in it.” (SOURCE)
- “If Romney becomes president , hella people gonna try to assassinate him.” (SOURCE)
- “Soo Romney said black folks are free loaders n basically tryna get us back to slavery…..I will personally Assassinate dat mf.” (SOURCE)
- “If Romney Get Elected Somebody Gotta Assassinate Him” Me Duh Nigha ??” (SOURCE)
But when Conservatives are bullied, there’s nary a sound. Let me recount some recent history. Donna Dewitt, the outgoing president of the South Carolina AFL-CIO, took a baseball bat to a piñata that bore the image of South Carolina governor Nikki Haley. As expected, the union crowd went wild with delightful cheers.
Gov. Haley posted the following in her Facebook page: “Wow. I wonder if the unions think this kind of thing will make people take them seriously.”
You and I know that if Gov. Haley had taken a baseball bat to a piñata that was the image of Donna DeWitt, the unions and Leftist media would be denouncing her from every radio tower, printing press, and TV talk show.
All Liberals have to do to dismiss criticism is to follow DeWitt’s example: “It was all fun and games, and there was certainly no ill intent.” How convenient . . . and evil.
http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/10/wheres-liberal-outrage-over-riot-and-assassination-talk/
Obama ‘Punting’ on New EPA Rules Until Post-Election
A new report from Senate Republicans warns that the Obama administration and the EPA are delaying implementation of painful new regulations until after the election.
The report from the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works’ Minority Staff, “A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013,” points to a “slew of job-killing EPA regulations that the Obama-EPA has put on hold until after the election but will be on the ‘to-do’ list for 2013.”
“As the economy has continued to falter over the past year, team Obama has been delaying rule after rule that will eliminate American jobs, drive up the price of gas at the pump even more, impose construction bans on local communities, and essentially shut down American oil, natural gas, and coal production. They don’t want this economic pain to hit American families just before the election because it would cost President Obama votes.”
The report goes on to state: “It’s pretty clear that if President Obama secures a second term, the Obama-EPA will have a very busy next four years, moving full speed ahead to implement numerous major rules and regulations that he has delayed or punted due to the upcoming election.
“The radical environmental left may not need to worry, but what about American families, who are working hard in tough economic times, trying to make ends meet?
“As the nation struggles to recover from a lagging economy in the coming year, Americans could also be grappling with a regulatory onslaught from the Obama-EPA that will strangle economic growth, destroy millions of jobs, and dramatically raise the price of goods, the cost of electricity, and the price of gas at the pump.”
The “punted” regulations include:
- Greenhouse gas rules that will “virtually eliminate coal as a fuel option for future electric power generation,” and inflict new permitting costs on more than 37,000 farms.
- New ozone standards that would cost $90 billion a year.
- Regulations on hydraulic fracturing that will have “serious impacts on domestic energy production.”
- Expansion of federal control “over virtually every body of water in the United States, no matter how small.”
- Storm water regulations that could include “mandates on cities to change existing buildings, storm water sewers, and streets.”
- Reductions in the sulfur content in gasoline that could boost prices by 9 cents a gallon.
- Clean Water Act rules that “could require expensive new construction at power plants to lower fish deaths.” Other regulations would affect coal ash, farm dust, oil and gasoline spill prevention, and more.
“It reveals a president who is more concerned about saving his own job than the millions of Americans who are looking for one today.” |
No comments:
Post a Comment