Tag Archives: Libya

The Questions About Libya Continue

Posted on by

This is a video of a CBS interview of one of the security people withdrawn from Libya in August:

The interview was posted at Hot Air yesterday. It is becoming obvious that the State Department cut security at the embassy at a time when it was needed.

The article at Hot Air reports:

One State Department source tells CBS News the security teams weren’t “pulled,” that their mission was simply over.

State Department officials have told CBS News that Wood was not part of the security assessment in Benghazi and that his assignment to Tripoli means he was unfamiliar with the local situation in the smaller port city in the country’s east.

Wood, however, says some of the members of his own team and additional personnel from the State Department’s elite security detail – the two teams which left Libya in August – would have traveled to Benghazi with Ambassador Stevens had they still been in the country. He did not say how many additional security agents might have been deployed for the Ambassador’s trip to the city, which is at least 400 miles east of Tripoli, but he tells Attkisson that he’s wondered if it might have made a difference on the night of the attack.

This really looks as if the State Department had no idea of what was going on in Libya.

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Is Disturbing

Posted on by

There are three major stories on the Internet today dealing with the attack on the American embassy in Libya and the death of American Ambassador Chris Stevens. The stories are at the Washington Examiner,  Breitbart.com, and The Daily Beast.

The Washington Examiner reports:

“In addition, multiple U.S. federal government officials have confirmed to the Committee (House Oversight and Government Reform Committee) that, prior to the September 11 attack, the U.S. mission in Libya made repeated requests for increased security in Benghazi,” Issa and Chaffetz added (my emphasis). “The mission in Libya, however, was denied these resources by officials in Washington.”

The committee noted 13 “security threats” in Benghazi, including an attempt to assassinate the British ambassador to Libya.

Breitbart lists the attacks prior to September 11:

  • April 6, 2012 – An IED is thrown over the consulate fence in Benghazi.
  • April 11, 2012 – A gun battle 4km from the Benghazi consulate.
  • April 25, 2012 – A US Embassy guard in Tripoli is detained at a militia checkpoint.
  • April 26, 2012 – A fistfight escalates into a gunfight at a Benghazi Medical University and a US Foreign Service Officer in attendance is evacuated.
  • April 27, 2012 – Two South African contractors are kidnapped in Benghazi, questioned and released.
  • May 1, 2012 – Deputy Commander of the local guard force in Tripoli is carjacked and beaten.
  • May 22, 2012 – RPG rounds are fired at the Red Cross outpost in Benghazi.
  • June 2012 – A pro-Gaddafi Facebook page posts photos of Ambassador Stevens making his morning run in the city of Tripoli and made a threat toward the Ambassador.
  • June 6, 2012 – An IED is left at the gate of the US consulate in Benghazi.
  • June 10, 2012 – RPG is fired at the convoy carrying the British Ambassador in broad daylight as he is nearing the British consulate in Benghazi. No one is killed but the British later close the consulate.
  • Late June, 2012 – Another attack on the Red Cross outpost in Benghazi, this one in daylight. The Red Cross pulls out leaving the US consulate the last western outpost in the city.
  • August 6, 2012 – Attempted carjacking of a vehicle with US diplomatic plates in Tripoli.
  • Weeks prior to Sept. 11, 2012 – Libyan guards at the Benghazi consulate are “warned by their family members to quit their jobs” because of rumors of a “impending attack.”

The Daily Beast reports:

Security deteriorated significantly in June. On June 10, a man fired a rocket-propelled grenade in broad daylight into a convoy carrying the British ambassador to Libya. Later that month, the Red Cross was attacked again. By the end of June, the British Consulate and the Red Cross closed their facilities in Benghazi. By the start of July, the U.S. Consulate was one of the only Western targets left in the city.

“This was not a safe country on its way to a normalized situation. It was a very volatile situation,” Chaffetz told The Daily Beast.

The House Oversight Committee is expected to hold a hearing on Oct. 10 on the threats leading up to the attack.

Someone made some serious mistakes here in evaluating the risk to our Ambassador and other embassy employees. It seems as if common sense would have either increased the security at the embassy or at least temporarily removed the embassy from Libya.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Things That Make You Wonder

Posted on by

The Daily Beast is reporting today that American intelligence services were aware within 24 hours that the attacks on the American Embassy in Benghazi were the work of al Qaeda.

The article reports:

Three separate U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast said the early information was enough to show that the attack was planned and the work of al Qaeda affiliates operating in Eastern Libya.

We are at war, and I understand the need for secrecy, but what reason would the current administration have to lie to the American people about this attack?

The article reports:

The question of what the White House knew, and when they knew it, will be of keen interest to members of Congress in the election year. Last Thursday, the Obama administration formally briefed House and Senate members on the attack. Those briefings however failed to satisfy many members, particularly Republicans. “That is the most useless, worthless briefing I have attended in a long time,” Sen. Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican, was quoted as saying. “There was very good information on this in the first 24 hours. These guys have a return address.”

After a while, you begin to wonder how much of what the Obama Administration is telling America is actually true.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Case Of Misplaced Priorities

Posted on by

The Obama Administration has become more concerned with its image in America’s liberal media that it is with doing its job.

The Hill reported today that the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal got more complete briefings from Hillary Clinton on the attack that killed U.S. envoy Christopher Stephens in Libya than Senate Republicans received.

The article reports:

“I was very disappointed in the briefing yesterday, too. The bottom line is, we asked questions like, ‘How many people were at the Benghazi consulate?’ You pick up The New York Times and you get a blow-by-blow description of what supposedly went on,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The Times published a timeline of the attacks chronicling militants gaining access to the U.S. compound after 9:35 pm on Sept. 11, American security forces attempting to retake it at 10:45 pm and American and Libyan forces regaining control of the main compound around 11:20 pm, before evacuating.

The article further states:

“We were told nothing. We were told absolutely nothing,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), ranking Republican on the Armed Services Panel.

McCain said the details lawmakers sought were in The Times and The Journal.

“If that isn’t an incredible disrespect to the members of the United States Senate, I don’t know what is,” he said. “It’s an example of the disdain with which this body is held by the administration, including, I’m sorry to say, the secretary of state.”

“She didn’t talk about anything,” McCain said of Clinton in a subsequent interview.

Senators asked Clinton about the sequence of events during the Benghazi attack. She and other officials declined to provide any specifics, citing an ongoing investigation.

If Washington is broken, part of the reason may be the fact that in an important national security matter, the Obama Administration chose to brief the friendly media rather than Congress.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Looking For The Underlying Cause Of The Embassy Attacks

Posted on by

CBN News posted a story today about one of the possible causes of the current riots (protests) in the Middle East. Admittedly, the attacks on they Libyan and Egyptian Embassies were probably related to the anniversary of the September 11 attacks and the call for the release of the blind sheik, but there is another aspect of the story.

Gary Lane at CBN reminds us:

At a recent gathering of his supporters in Beirut, Nasrallah (Hezbollah‘s Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah) called on the international community to adopt a law that would prohibit attacks against any “divine” religion.

Each year Muslim nations, often led by Pakistan, propose that the United Nations pass a defamation of religion law. The United States and other Western democracies have beaten back those efforts.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, speaking before the United Nations, stated:

“We are living through a period of unease. We are also seeing incidents of intolerance and hatred that are then exploited by others. Voices of moderation and calm need to make themselves heard at this time,” Ban told the assembly Tuesday.

“We all need to speak up in favor of mutual respect and understanding of the values and beliefs of others. The United Nations must rise to the moment,” he said.

Read the fine print here–the law the Muslims want would prohibit attacks against any ‘divine’ religion. Who determines which religions are ‘divine’?

Hang on to the First Amendment–it is coming under attack from the U.N.

Enhanced by Zemanta

What In The World Happened In Libya ?

Posted on by

There are numerous sources for this article–CNN today, Politico today, ABC News today and Ed Morrissey at Hot Air. The stories are similar, but they way the facts are laid out is slightly different.

CNN reports:

According to one of the Libyan security guards who was stationed at one of the gates armed with only a radio, the assault began simultaneously from three directions.

Heavy machine guns and rocket -propelled grenades were used, according to the guard. He said masked men threatened to kill him at gunpoint for ‘protecting the infidels. He declined to appear on camera for fear of repercussions.

ABC News reports:

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi last week was not premeditated, directly contradicting top Libyan officials who say the attack was planned in advance.

“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,” Rice told me this morning on “This Week.”

Just for the record, I am not convinced that three-pronged attacks begin spontaneously.

Hot Air reports:

About 50 arrests have been made in connection with the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi in which the American Ambassador and three other consulate employees were killed, and some of the suspects involved are from outside the country, Libya’s president told CBS News.

In an interview for “Face the Nation” Sunday, President Mohamed Magariaf also said that evidence “leaves us with no doubt” that the attack was pre-planned.

“It was planned, definitely, it was planned by foreigners, by people who entered the country a few months ago, and they were planning this criminal act since their arrival,” he told Bob Schieffer.

Politico reports:

Libya President Mohamed Yousef El-Magariaf said Sunday that 50 arrests have been made in connection with last week’s “preplanned” attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi that left U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead.

“The way these perpetrators acted and moved — I think we, and they’re choosing the specific date for this so-called demonstration, I think we have no, this leaves us with no doubt that this was pre-planned, determined,” Magariaf said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

Unfortunately, because we are in the ‘silly season’ which precedes an election, the American media is not telling us the full story. The British newspapers have posted many more details and stories behind what has happened. The thing to remember here is very simple, “It isn’t about a movie.” The movie on YouTube was not helpful in America’s relationship with Muslims, but how many Muslims do you believe have actually seen the movie? How many of the people attacking American embassies around the world have access to the Internet?

At some point in time we need to understand that Muslims who support the idea of a world-wide caliphate do not like America. Our freedom is a threat to their plans. They consider us as ‘the great Satan.’ That fact has not changed, despite the efforts of President Obama. It will not change. It is taught to Muslim children from birth. Until the teaching changes, the problem will not change. If you are truly interested in understanding how terrorists are trained, I recommend this video at CBN.com, which is an interview of a former terrorist telling the story of his upbringing, training, and eventual denunciation of terrorism.

It isn’t about a movie–it’s about the survival of western civilization.

Enhanced by Zemanta

An Informed Perspective On The Middle East

Posted on by

Michael Ledeen is the Freedom Scholar at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He is a highly regarded expert on Iran’s Green Movement and maintains close ties to opposition groups inside Iran. He posted an article at PJMedia yesterday that accurately describes what is happening in the Middle East.

He opens his article:

Killing Americans serves several purposes in the war being waged against us (we have yet to seriously engage against our known enemies): first, it’s what the war is all about. They want us dead or dominated. Second, it helps recruitment, which had dropped after the defeat of Iran, Syria, and al-Qaeda in Iraq. Morale had also dropped, and stories claiming that the top American in Libya had been raped before he was executed feeds the blood lust of jihadists, whose language and fantasies are rich with such images. Third, it enhances the power of the unseen moving hand. Fourth, it discourages our current and would-be friends and allies.

No serious person believes that an obscure movie shown to less than a dozen people many months ago was the “cause” of the simultaneous assaults in Cairo and Benghazi. Or that the assaults were unrelated, let alone spontaneous. Or that there was no state actor involved in the operation.

So why is the American press refusing to report this aspect of the story? Because the story behind the story is the total failure of President Obama’s outreach to terrorists.

Mr. Ledeen’s article concludes:

If we do not support revolution within Iran, we will get more of these attacks, and more dead Americans. In the end, we will fulfill Churchill’s prophecy to Chamberlain on the day after Munich: you thought you had to choose between dishonor and war. You chose dishonor, and you will have war. We may yet have time to choose honor — support those who have already risked their lives to defeat our enemies — and avoid the big war relentlessly engulfing us.

It would be nice if we could ignore what Iran is doing, but we do so at our own peril.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Someone Is Finally Telling The Truth

Posted on by

One of the casualties of political correctness is honesty. We simply do not call things what they are for fear of causing offense or facing the consequences of what actually is.

Politico posted an article yesterday by Newt Gingrich commenting on recent events in the Middle East.

The article quotes Mr. Gingrich:

The president asserted we have to oppose “the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants.”

Clinton reinforced his analysis when she said, “We condemn in the strongest terms this senseless act of violence.”

This concept of “senseless violence” is at the heart of the left’s refusal to confront the reality of radical Islamists.

These are not acts of senseless violence.

These are acts of war.

We can’t successfully deal with a situation until we realize what it is. One of the things pointed out in the article is the question of how this video clip reached Egypt and Libya. Does anyone actually believe that the film was responsible for these attacks? Have we forgotten the emphasis terrorists put on dates and the fact that the attacks occurred on September 11?

The article concludes:

It is no accident that the embassy in Cairo issued a groveling statement, apologizing to the haters for having inconvenienced them with American freedom of speech.

The embassy was simply following Clinton’s lead, set months earlier in her meetings with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

The OIC has a long- term campaign to manipulate the U.S. government into defining any criticism or improper reference to Islam as unacceptable.

No one should be confused by this. As Andy McCarthy wrote yesterday, the Islamist definition of heresy would destroy American free speech.

The Obama administration is waging war on the Catholic Church while appeasing the most extreme elements of Islam.

This is the bizarre situation we now find ourselves in.

We need to remember–When America has a weak President, the world is a more dangerous place.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

As The Smoke Clears

Posted on by

As we all recover from the shock of having the body of an America Ambassador dragged through the streets of Libya, we need to step back and take a look at what happened on September 11, 2012. First we need to realize that it happened on September 11, 2012. Second we need to note that the American Embassy in Libya was not protected in the same way that American Embassies overseas are usually protected.

Hot Air reported yesterday:

The consulate where the American ambassador to Libya was killed on Tuesday is an “interim facility” not protected by the contingent of Marines that safeguards embassies, POLITICO has learned…

A senior administration official Wednesday called the Benghazi consulate “an interim facility,” which the State Department began using “before the fall of Qadhafi.” It was staffed Tuesday by Libyan and State Department security officers. The consulate came under fire from heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades at about 10 p.m. local time on Tuesday. By the time the attack ended several hours later, four Americans were dead and three others had been injured.

The Benghazi consulate had “lock-and-key” security, not the same level of defenses as a formal embassy, an intelligence source told POLITICO. That means it had no bulletproof glass, reinforced doors or other features common to embassies. The intelligence source contrasted it with the American embassy in Cairo, Egypt – “a permanent facility, which is a lot easier to defend.” The Cairo embassy also was attacked Tuesday.

It gets worse. Michael Rubin posted an article at the Daily Caller explaining how demonstrations in Islamic countries work:

The idea that the riots were spontaneous shows detachment from the reality of the Middle East. Dozens of heavily armed and murderous Islamists sacking embassies are not flash mobs of teenagers converging on a mall food court. When I lived in pre-war Iraq, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and Yemen, my students and colleagues often spoke of how they had been informed by government representatives where to board buses to attend “spontaneous” rallies to be held the following day.

He concludes:

The war on terrorism and, more specifically, the fight against Islamist radicalism, is an ideological battle. The United States, moderate Muslims, and those valuing freedom and liberty must triumph not only on the battlefield, but also in the classroom and on the airwaves. Alas, apologies and self-flagellation represent not a path to peace, but little more than preemptive surrender.

That is a lesson we need to learn very quickly.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

How Did We Get Here And What Are We Going To Do About It ?

Posted on by

A website called Twitchy posted a ‘tweet’ today from Anthea Butler, an Associate Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Pennsylvania.

The tweet:

Butler @AntheaButler

Good Morning. How soon is Sam Bacile going to be in jail folks? I need him to go now.When Americans die because you are stupid…

12 Sep 12

I realize that I am not the most educated person in the world and maybe I shouldn’t question a college professor, but my first question is, “Did this woman raise any children?” Why is that question relevant? Because when you raise children, you learn some things. You learn that bad behavior is bad behavior and that there is no excuse for it. You learn that if you do not deal with bad behavior, it gets worse.

Sam Bacile (the person who made or is making a movie that made Muslims angry) is not responsible for the violence in Libya or Egypt. It is no coincidence that this violence occurred on September 11th. This is simply more bad behavior from the people who brought us 9/11 in 2001. When are we going to wake up and admit that we have to deal with the continuing Muslim violence or it will escalate? This is the first American Ambassador killed since 1979 (under Jimmy Carter oddly enough).

Yahoo News lists five ambassadors killed by terrorists:

—Adolph Dubs, in Afghanistan, 1979

—Francis E. Meloy Jr., in Lebanon, 1976

—Rodger P. Davies, in Cyprus, 1974

—Cleo A. Noel Jr., in Sudan, 1973

—John Gordon Mein, in Guatemala, 1968

Another lesson learned from motherhood–if there are no consequences to bad behavior, the behavior will continue. Don’t we have any mothers in our government who can figure that out?

The people in our embassy were not killed because Sam Bacile was stupid, they were killed because people in power are unwilling to protect Americans at home or abroad. Was anyone in the American Embassy armed? Did we let people die because we were afraid of the public relations fallout? Get over it. Muslims don’t hate us because of public relations, they hate us because we are free, successful, and generally unwilling to live under Sharia Law. No amount of public relations is going to change that.

Meanwhile, we need to pray for the families of the people lost yesterday.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

What Happens When America Does Not Show Strength

Posted on by

The American Embassies in Egypt and Libya were attacked yesterday on the anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attack on America. The supposed cause of these attacks was a film clip shown on YouTube that was unflattering to Islam’s prophet Muhammad. Four people were killed, including the American Ambassador to Libya–the first American Ambassador to be killed overseas since 1979.

Stop and think about this for a minute. Four people are dead because a film showed something a group of Muslims found offensive.

Violence in response to violence is not generally a good idea, but what do we do now? We helped the revolution in Libya and we have given money to the new government of Egypt. This is the thanks we get. Al Qaeda and Muslim extremism is partially funded by the money Americans spend to put gasoline in their cars. There is an immediate response that will get some results and a long term response that will get permanent results.

A friend of mine recently lent me the book, The Arab Mind. In the opening chapters of the book, the author, Raphael Patan, talks about some of the roots of our current battle with radical Islam. The book points out that the Egyptians and Arabs saw the 1973 war between Egypt and Israel as a Muslim victory. This emboldened them, and the oil embargo and rapid rise in the price of oil followed. The new-found riches caused by the sharp spike in oil prices allowed Arab countries to buy anything they wanted to exert their power.

There is a two-fold way to end the Muslim crime-wave of the last forty years. The first step is to cut off all aid to Egypt and Libya. The second step will take a bit longer. America needs to develop its own energy resources–NOW! We need to build oil refineries, build the Keystone Pipeline, and drill offshore in America instead of paying Brazil to drill off their shore (we loaned them the money and they are selling the oil to China). If green energy is viable, it will develop naturally without taxpayer money. If the government stops over-regulating the energy business, America can be energy independent within five to ten years. American energy independence is the only answer to Muslim extremists.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

An Interesting Perspective On National Healthcare

Posted on by

This morning while perusing the Wall Street Journal, I came across an article that caused me to pause for a moment. It had to do with Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, the convicted Lockerbie bomber, who died in Libya on Sunday. Mr. al-Megrahi was released from jail in Scotland three years ago when doctors declared that he had only three months to live (he was suffering from prostate cancer).

The article reports:

Karol Sikora, a leading cancer specialist who examined Megrahi shortly before his release, explains that predicting how long a patient with end-stage prostate cancer has to live is a  “value judgment of probablility,” not an exact science. But Dr. Sikora also writes that his initial three-month prognosis was “based on his treatment as an NHS patient in Glasgow at the time, when not even standard docetaxel chemotherapy was offered.” by contrast, “Mr. Megrahi almost certainly had excellent care in Tripoli.”

The article further points out that “standard docetaxel chemotherapy”  did become available to some Scottish patients in certain circumstances in 2006, but was not available to Megrahi. When Megrahi arrived in Libya, he received advanced chemotherapy as well as abiraterone, a drug approved by U. S. regulators in 2011.  The treatment he received in Libya is still largely unavailable through the British medical system, although next year abiraterone will be available to the English and Welsh (but not in Scotland due to the price).

The article concludes:

Prime Minister David Cameron has often said that Megrahi should never have been released, and that’s right. But perhaps the Libyan’s longevity should spark a different line of questioning: whether the most compassionate aspect of his release was freeing him from government health care–and whether nonterrorists deserve similar succor.

Something to think about as the Supreme Court debates Obamacare…

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Complexities Of Syria

Posted on by

The slaughter that is taking place in Syria should be unacceptable to all civilized nations. Unfortunately it is not–the United Nations has commented on it a few times, sent people to see it, but has not really done anything. I have mixed emotions about any role America should play for two reasons–we don’t know who the opposition in Syria is (we could be enabling the Muslim Brotherhood to take over another nation) and also if we decided to intervene in Syria it would get very messy very quickly. Syria is well-armed and has a formidable military. Syria is not Libya. The reason Europe was so willing to help in Libya is that Europe gets most of its oil from Libya. The only country truly interested in Syria is Iran–it is their gateway to Lebanon, Israel and the surrounding of Iraq.

Reza Kahlili posted an article at World Net Daily detailing some of Iran’s involvement in Syria.

The article reports:

The commander of the Quds Forces, Qassem Soleimani, and 15,000 of his fighters have entered Syria with the mission of assisting in the suppression of the Syrian protesters, it was reported last month.

The Quds Forces are acting as a firewall for the Assad regime, because many officers in the Syrian army are joining the opposition over the mass killings of civilians, which so far number more than 7,000.

The article further states that any action against Syria by the United States will be followed by a counterattack by Syria, Iran and Hezbollah on Israel and on American resources in the region.

The situation in Syria is awful. It is probably going to continue to be awful. I am not sure America’s intervening in that situation will make it any less awful.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Is America Endorsing Mob Rule ?

Posted on by
Muammar al-Gaddafi at the 12th AU summit, Febr...

Image via Wikipedia

This is the link to the YouTube video of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton talking about the death of Libyan leader Muammar Al-Qaddafi. I understand that it is possible to be happy about the death of a tyrant, but her statement is totally out of bounds. She could have commented on Qaddafi’s death in a much more graceful way.

Andrew McCarthy (a senior fellow at the National Review Institute) posted an article at National Review Online today with his comments on the death of Gaddafi. Mr. McCarthy was the Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York who prosecuted the ‘Blind Sheik’ after the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. In prosecuting that case, Mr. McCarthy studied the Koran and the Islamist culture in order to get a better picture of the root causes of the attack. In National Review Online, he reminds us that the removal of Qaddafi as the ruler of Libya may not have the result America is looking for.

Mr. McCarthy reminds us that the Arab Spring has some ugly aspects:

The most obviously ugly of these is that a throng of seething Islamists stripped, beat, paraded, and finally shot Qaddafi execution-style, all the while screaming the signature “Allahu Akbar!” battle cry with a fervor that would have made Mohamed Atta blush. They then shoved the despot’s corpse into a refrigerator — to maintain it for further triumphant display before thousands of gawking spectators. Too bad there was no official from the Obama administration’s Islamic Thought Police on hand to remind the mob of the Koran’s oft-quoted (but oftener ignored) teaching that to slay a single person is to slay all of mankind.

Mr. McCarthy concludes:

Qaddafi’s escape from his last holdout was thus cut off by NATO airstrikes. Trapped and hidden in a sewer, he was dragged out and brutalized — not for intelligence, but for sport. There is video here if you can stomach it. What NATO abetted was not a military capture. It was an assassination. We will be worse off that it happened. And the way it happened should sicken us.

No one will argue that Qaddafi was a brutal dictator. However, in recent years he had greatly limited his terrorist activities and was no longer a threat to the west. As the new government immediately declared Sharia Law when they took over Libya, it is a pretty safe bet that they will be a threat to the west. Terrorism from Libya may again become an everyday thing. The way Qaddafi died is upsetting. Secretary of State Clinton’s comments on Qaddafi’s death are even more upsetting. I think we have backed the wrong people in the Arab Spring. The only way that freedom and democracy will come the the Middle East and North Africa is the have a revolution in Iran. That was the revolution we refused to support after the last fixed election. The Obama administration seems to have a definite gift for backing the wrong horse.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tying Up The Loose Ends Before The War Starts

Posted on by
Benjamin Netanyahu

Image via Wikipedia

I don’t mean to rain on anyone’s parade, but sometime in the next year there will be a war in the Middle East which will probably involve Israel. As soon as the United States begins to limit its presence in the area, the Muslim Brotherhood (a group charged with expanding the caliphate through democratic means) will consolidate its gains in Egypt, Libya, and Turkey, attempt to increase its power in Iraq and Afghanistan, and begin to make things very uncomfortable for Israel. I am not sure what form any of this will take, but it is fairly easy to see it coming.

Meanwhile, Israel is quietly getting prisoners back from Muslim countries as it prepares for the inevitable. Yesterday Haaretz reported that:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet approved on Tuesday a prisoner exchange deal with Egypt to release suspected Israeli spy Ilan Grapel in exchange for 25 Egyptian prisoners. 

The article further reports:

Grapel was originally charged with espionage, although the charges were later changed to incitement, insurrection, and damaging a public building during the uprising that took place in Egypt earlier this year. The U.S. has been especially active in trying to secure Grapel’s release during the last two months. 

I do wonder why the United States was so interested in getting Grapel released. As usual, Israel had to engage in an uneven swap to get its citizen back.

I see this as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s effort to bring home all the Israeli prisoners held in Muslim countries he can before any hostilities begin. There may be more of these deals in the near future.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Just When You Thought The World Might Actually Be A Safe Place…

Posted on by
An HH-60H Seahawk helicopter discharges counte...

Image via Wikipedia

Fox News reported yesterday that 20,000 portable, heat-seeking missiles appear to have vanished from an Army warehouse in Libya.

The article reports:

The new revelations stoke ongoing fears that such weapons, which are light, relatively easy to use and have the capacity to take down a commercial airplane, could end up in the wrong hands as the Libyan war that ousted Muammar Qaddafi winds down.

The wrong hands????? Do we know who the right hands are? One of the problems in ‘freeing’ Libya from Muammar Qaddafi is that we are not sure of the backgrounds of the people we are supporting in the effort to oust Qaddafi. Some of the people we are handing weapons to are the same people who were shooting at us in Iraq and Afghanistan in recent years. We have no guarantees that a new government in Libya will be any more democratic or friendly to the west than the old one. Meanwhile, we seem to have lost some heat-seeking missiles. Great.

Enhanced by Zemanta

What Have We Done In Libya ?

Posted on by

The Foundry at Heritage.org posted a draft of the proposed constitution of the new government in Libya.

Article I of the General Provisions states:

Libya is an independent Democratic State wherein the people are the source of authorities. The city of Tripoli shall be the capital of the State. Islam is the Religion of the State and the principal source of legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence (Sharia). Arabic is its official language while preserving the linguistic and cultural rights of all components of the Libyan society. The State shall guarantee for non-Moslems the freedom of practising religious rights and shall guarantee respect for their systems of personal status.

There is a problem with this paragraph. Sharia Law demands the death penalty for anyone who converts from Muslim to Christianity. Sharia Law demands that non-Muslims convert to Islam or do not have full rights as citizens. Sharia Law does not allow for freedom of religion.

Article 6 includes the sentence:

Libyans are brothers and their official relationship shall be based on law rather than tribal, proud or personal loyalty. Libyans shall be equal before the law. They shall enjoy equal civil and political rights, shall have the same opportunities, and be subject to the same public duties and obligations, without discrimination due to religion, belief, race, language, wealth, kinship or political opinions or social status.

The State shall guarantee for woman all opportunities which shall allow her to participate entirely and actively in political, economic and social spheres.

The above two paragraphs are in total contradiction to Sharia Law. As I said, this is a draft of the proposed constitution. Other than the Sharia Law part, it looks really good. The problem is that the Sharia Law part may override all the other parts and turn the country into another Iran.


Enhanced by Zemanta