I say yes, you say no, OR People are Strange

1179817991801180318041828

Comments

  • bluedahlia
    bluedahlia Member Posts: 6,944
    edited June 2014

    Feeling better, but no 2 days are the same!  I'm grateful for the good ones and tolerate the bad ones!  Saving all the big guns for my son's wedding in August!

  • RetiredLibby
    RetiredLibby Member Posts: 1,992
    edited June 2014

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/talking-points-iraq-crisis

     

    Mother Jones

    7 Talking Points You Need for Discussing the Iraq Crisis

    Especially if you're talking to a Republican braying for US military action

    —By David Corn

    | Fri Jun. 13, 2014 3:23 PM EDT

    1. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney invaded Iraq with no clear and comprehensive plan for what to do after the invasion and the end of Saddam Hussein's regime. Weeks before the war, the administration stated there was no reason to fear that sectarian conflict would ensue after Saddam was booted.

    2. Following the invasion, the Bush-Cheney administration decided to prohibit the Sunni-dominated Baath Party from participating in a post-Saddam government and decommissioned the existing Baathist-led military. This caused deep resentment among Sunnis, especially former military commanders and soldiers (who would now be available for an armed opposition). The move had the effect of banishing Iraqis with governing and security experience from the post-Saddam order. That would be good for chaos and conflict.

    3. The Bush-Cheney deciders, having decimated the Sunni ruling establishment, backed the creation of a government led by hard-line Shiite religious parties, including the party of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The Maliki regime has been corrupt, authoritarian, and incompetent—and allied closely with the Shiite government in Iran. (Iran was a key sponsor of Maliki when he was in exile during the Saddam years.) The thuggish Maliki government, supported by the Bush administration and then the Obama administration, has treated the Sunni areas of Iraq as enemy territory and refused to share power with Sunnis—stoking the deep-seated tensions between Sunnis and Shiites. (As the murderous Sunni ultra-extremists of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, have gained power in Mosul and other Sunni-dominated cities and towns, non-extremist Sunnis have sided with—or tolerated—the jihadists because of their shared hatred of the Maliki regime and the Iraqi military, which Sunnis in Mosul considered an occupying force).

    4. President Barack Obama did not leave a residual force of American troops in Iraq after he withdrew US troops because Maliki would not sign a Status of Forces Agreement protecting US soldiers. Though Bush also did not negotiate a long-term SOFA, prominent Republicans, including Senator John McCain and Mitt Romney, have slammed Obama for failing to obtain such an agreement. But Fareed Zakaria reports that a senior Iraqi politician told him, "Maliki cannot allow American troops to stay on. Iran has made very clear to Maliki that it's No. 1 demand is that there be no American troops remaining in Iraq. And Maliki owes them."

    5. The United States has provided much training and equipment to the Iraqi military—$25 billion in military aid—before and after the US withdrawal. Yet under Maliki the Iraqi army has not been professionalized and has committed repeated abuses against civilians, according to Human Rights Watch, including unlawful raids and arrests, torture, and indiscriminate shelling. When a relatively small band of jihadists attacked Mosul and Tikrit, four major divisions folded. Training and equipment does not help if soldiers strip off their uniforms and flee because they are not committed to the mission and the government.

    6. More US assistance to Maliki and his military may not make the difference. (See No. 5.) Moreover, Iran has sent special forces to Iraq to assist Maliki—bolstering Iraq's dependence on Iran. If the United States were to funnel additional military equipment (and more advanced equipment) to Maliki's army, it could well end up with the ISIS jihadists (given the Iraq military's habit to cut and run) or—get this—with the Revolutionary Guard  of Iran. A good deal for Tehran. And if US air strikes are ordered in Iraq to assist Maliki, American fighter jets or drones would be deployed in a tactical alliance with Iran.

    7. The current crisis is not the result of inadequate US support of Maliki and the Iraqi military. It is the outcome of Maliki's failures, which have provided the evildoers of ISIS—a band that does threaten civilians and stability in the region—an opportunity, and these failures were enabled by the Bush administration and unaddressed by the Obama crew. Unless the basic dynamic is altered, any military action—whether taken by the United States, regional allies, and/or NATO—will be as effective as pounding sand.

    ----------------------------------------------------

     

  • QuinnCat
    QuinnCat Member Posts: 3,456
    edited June 2014

    I remember those days leading up to the invasion of Iraq.  Seemed like anyone reading (real) newspapers, at the time, knew there were no WMDs and knew well before that (reading PNAC or hearing anecdotal stories such as what Wolfowitz - supreme Neocon, would say to his neighbor in D.C. before we invaded, for example) that the reason for going into Iraq was not about WMDs.  To this day, I'm not sure what it was about  (I did not watch RM's synthesis of it).  RL - any guesses?  Was it about oil?  I'm not sure.  Did they think we'd get to stay and control Iraq? 

    Also, as soon as we invaded we knew there were no nuclear warheads. Why didn't we turn around and get out right then (ok, rhetorical question)?

    This whole event was destined to happen and just renews my hatred, yes hatred, for Bush/Cheney and their gang of warlords.  How much crap was Obama expected to clean up from these fools?

  • RetiredLibby
    RetiredLibby Member Posts: 1,992
    edited June 2014

    We knew before we invaded that there were no WMDs.  No tubes, no yellowcake from Niger, no sarin gas, no WMDs at all.

    We went into Iraq because Cheney wanted control of the oil.  He also saw an opportunity to make a lot of money for Halliburton.  Remember, Halliburton is an oil services company.  He persuaded Dumbya to go along with it because Dumbya thinks he is an oil man - and he played on Dumbya's ego to do better than his father.  It wasn't about "gettin' the guy who tried to kill my daddy" - it was about the screw-up loser son trying to finish what he perceived as his father's failure (to take Saddam Hussein out during Gulf I).  What Dumbya wasn't bright enough to know is that Bush the first deliberately did NOT take Saddam Hussein out because we had nobody to replace him.  Saddam Hussein was exceptionally efficient at killing his opposition.  Bush I and his administration correctly understood that taking Saddam Hussein out without a viable replacement (a strong opposition party and structure) would lead to chaos in Iraq that would spill over and destabilize the entire Middle East.  Oh look!  That's EXACTLY what happened!  Saddam Hussein was a counterweight to the destabilizing influence of Iran and its fomenting of Islamic revolution throughout the Muslim world.  Once Hussein was gone, there was no regional presence to keep Iran in check.

    Cheney wanted control of Iraq's oil.  He thought te U.S. would bully Iraq into long-term favorable oil contracts.  When that didn't work, he concentrated on enriching himself through Halliburton and its subsidiaries (KBR, etc) by providing services to the USG under no-bid contracts at exhorbitant rates.

    It was all about the money for Cheney and the neocons.  

  • IllinoisLady
    IllinoisLady Member Posts: 29,082
    edited June 2014

    Yes, major clean-up, still going on.  Sadly, references to THE above team are I think often seen as trying to blame them for Obama's ( their ideas, not mine ) poor showing.  What a JOKE with a huge capital J.  Lots more that could be said but you said it all Kam.  There really isn't a "Hell" but if there were these would be two of the most deserving early entrants in my book.

    Jackie

  • QuinnCat
    QuinnCat Member Posts: 3,456
    edited June 2014

    When Hilary ran in 2008, I could not vote for her (and I got plenty of hell from my liberal friends) because of her vote to go into Iraq.  It was so obvious that Cheney et al had ulterior motives.  I'm sure she knew too - who wouldn't know except maybe those watching Fox News are/or not paying attention.   Was she too afraid to vote no, really?  That and her Bosnia sniper story.....

    Anyway, strange that the Neocons dusted themselves off to appear on all of the Sunday Talking Heads shows.  I didn't watch, so not sure what propaganda they were spewing, but really, what in the heck would they say?  Anybody listen?

  • QuinnCat
    QuinnCat Member Posts: 3,456
    edited June 2014

    Oh - I see the GOP is rewriting history right now, claiming we went into Iraq to liberate the Iraqi's and now Obama is blowing it.  Will the extent of their lying never cease?

    JohnCornyn         @JohnCornynFollow

    Sad but true @benshapiro: It took nearly 4,500 American lives to win freedom for Iraq. It took one president to lose it.

    Geez - I can cut and paste a tweet, but not a url.....look for huffingtonpost.

  • crazy4carrots
    crazy4carrots Member Posts: 5,324
    edited June 2014

    Quinn - They're trying to convince themselves of it, along with their deteriorating base.  They seem to forget that history (and don't forget Desert Storm, it's ALWAYS about the money) is just a couple of keystrokes away.  I truly believe they do not know how the internet works.

    And....wonder of wonders!...even that evil old Pat Robertson is now saying the U.S. should never have entered Iraq.  No doubt he's hoping that if he makes amends, his god will forgive him and admit him into his idea of heaven.

  • RetiredLibby
    RetiredLibby Member Posts: 1,992
    edited June 2014

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-heritages-ugly-benghazi-panel/2014/06/16/b8bd423c-f5a3-11e3-a606-946fd632f9f1_story.html?hpid=z5

    This will not shame the wingnutters, but it does expose them for what they are.  Sickening, isn't it?  They vent their hatred, racism and religious intolerance every chance they get.  Imagine the screams of outrage if you replaced "Heritage Foundation" with "Brookings" and replace "Islam and Muslim" with "Christianity and Christians."  They would be firebombing the place.  Instead, it's "First Amendment rights" when they attack someone for their religion.  I am embarrassed to share a nationality with them.

    The comments are also -- illuminating.

     

    Washington Post

     Heritage’s ugly Benghazi panel

    by Dana Milbank, Washington Post opinion writer

    June 16, 2014

    Representatives of prominent conservative groups converged on the Heritage Foundation on Monday afternoon for the umpteenth in a series of gatherings to draw attention to the Benghazi controversy.

    But this one took an unexpected turn.

    What began as a session purportedly about “unanswered questions” surrounding the September 2012 attacks on U.S. facilities in Libya deteriorated into the ugly taunting of a woman in the room who wore an Islamic head covering.

    The session, as usual, quickly moved beyond the specifics of the assaults that left four Americans dead to accusations about the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrating the Obama administration, President Obama funding jihadists in their quest to destroy the United States, Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton attempting to impose Sharia blasphemy laws on Americans and Al Jazeera America being an organ of “enemy propaganda.”

    Then Saba Ahmed, an American University law student, stood in the back of the room and asked a question in a soft voice. “We portray Islam and all Muslims as bad, but there’s 1.8 billion followers of Islam,” she told them. “We have 8 million-plus Muslim Americans in this country and I don’t see them represented here.”

    Panelist Brigitte Gabriel of a group called ACT! for America pounced. She said “180 million to 300 million” Muslims are “dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization.” She told Ahmed that the “peaceful majority were irrelevant” in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and she drew a Hitler comparison: “Most Germans were peaceful, yet the Nazis drove the agenda and as a result, 60 million died.”

    “Are you an American?” Gabriel demanded of Ahmed, after accusing her of taking “the limelight” and before informing her that her “political correctness” belongs “in the garbage.”

    “Where are the others speaking out?” Ahmed was asked. This drew an extended standing ovation from the nearly 150 people in the room, complete with cheers.

    The panel’s moderator, conservative radio host Chris Plante, grinned and joined in the assault. “Can you tell me who the head of the Muslim peace movement is?” he demanded of Ahmed.

    “Yeah,” audience members taunted, “yeah.”

    Ahmed answered quietly, as before. “I guess it’s me right now,” she said.

    Plante had kicked off the forum by lamenting a “news media that is spectacularly uncurious when it comes to even the basic bare-bones facts of what happened in Benghazi that night.” But the hour that followed showed exactly why Americans (or at least the non-Fox-News-viewing subset of Americans) are rightly skeptical: The accusers’ allegations grow wilder by the day.

    Plante cast doubt on whether Ambassador Chris Stevens really died of smoke inhalation, demanding to see an autopsy report.

    Gabriel floated the notion that Stevens had been working on a weapons-swap program between Libya and Syria just before he was killed.

    Panelist Clare Lopez of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi said the perpetrators of the attack are “sipping frappes with journalists in juice bars.”

    One questioner said he had heard that Gen. Carter Ham, then-commander of U.S. Africa Command, had been “placed under house arrest” at the time of the Benghazi attack. “I’ve heard the same story,” Plante seconded.

    Another questioner, claiming to be from a Web site called GodSaveUSA.com, asked about an assertion that Obama “watched our people die” in real-time drone footage from Benghazi.

    Heritage hosted Monday’s gathering in conjunction with the Benghazi Accountability Coalition, a federation coordinated by Andrew McCarthy (prosecutor of the Blind Sheik, Omar Abdel Rahman) and including 15 groups such as Heritage, Judicial Watch and the Traditional Values Coalition. McCarthy’s talk to the gathering was titled “Just the Facts” — but the facts never had a chance against all the groups’ self-promotion (“Go to BenghaziCoalition.org” and “You need to be on our mailing list”) and anti-Islamist rhetoric that too often sounded just anti-Islam.

    Panelist Frank Gaffney revived allegations that former Clinton aide Huma Abedin has “deep personal” ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and said she may have advocated for laws against “Sharia blasphemy.” Gaffney also said the president’s view that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” is “a statement you could have found on al-Qaeda’s Web site.”

    But it was Gabriel, a Lebanese Christian by birth, who was most vitriolic when Ahmed asked her question. Gabriel dismissed as “irrelevant” the “2.3 million Arab Muslims living in the United States [when] it took 19 hijackers — 19 radicals — to bring America down.” She mocked Ahmed’s “point about peaceful, moderate Muslims” by making quotation marks with her fingers when she said the word peaceful.

    The young woman responded calmly to the taunts of the panelists and the crowd. “As a peaceful American Muslim,” she told them, “I would like to think I’m not that irrelevant.”


     

  • IllinoisLady
    IllinoisLady Member Posts: 29,082
    edited June 2014

    Only one sane person in that room ---  that is truly sad, and I was also taken by the fact of  "PLANTE and co-horts saying they had heard stories.  Yes, you hear stories and likely know they are not true or if there is a grain of truth the rest of the made-up self serving information has been arranged around it. 

    What totally hateful disgusting humans who made me ashamed as well.

    Jackie

  • crazy4carrots
    crazy4carrots Member Posts: 5,324
    edited June 2014

    If you'd like a cogent breakdown of GOP reichwing hypocrisy regarding Iraq, check out last night's Daily Show on Comedy Central.  Jon Stewart did an excellent breakdown.  Wish I could provide the link......

    Gabriel said that "Most Germans were peaceful, yet the Nazis drove the agenda....".  Yep, and that's exactly what the American reichwing are doing -- fostering intense hatred for Muslims (and blacks, and "illegals", and just about anyone not white and their brand of Christian).  The only "others" who are spared their hatred are the Jews, and that's only because they believe the fairytale rapture and Armageddon and, oh yes, all the Jews turning into Christians.

    As I've said before, Joseph Goebbels would be so proud of them.  If America is destroyed, we'll know exactly who did the deed.

  • RetiredLibby
    RetiredLibby Member Posts: 1,992
    edited June 2014


    Yep, it worked.  Thanks, GG!

     

  • gardengumby
    gardengumby Member Posts: 7,305
    edited June 2014

    I do NOT understand why we need to rely on a comedian (love John Stewart, BTW) to give us an accurate picture of the stance of these people a few short years ago.  Why does the mainstream media never seem to recall what was said - and never do they bring out old clips of these "esteemed" leaders.  Newsmen used to actually report news - real news.  Now it seems they just want to keep the story going - they talk and talk and talk and never say anything.  All of these rumors that have gone round - they could be quashed in a hot minute - but aren't.  

  • RetiredLibby
    RetiredLibby Member Posts: 1,992
    edited June 2014

    I know, GG.  And the wingnutters call it the "liberal" media.  Liberal my big toe.  A REAL news station would play a few of the clips from the whipping-up of war hysteria - "they will welcome us with flowers" and "the war will pay for itself with oil" and "WMDs" and the biggest, fattest, worst lie of all - "Oh yes, Saddam Hussein absolutely had something to do with September 11."  And Satan Cheney repeated that lie over and over, even AFTER the White House said it was false.

    I think that any public official advocating returning to Iraq should enlist and be on the front lines.  Their children and grandchildren, too.  I am sick to death of them sending other people's children off to die to make them money.


     

  • Anonymous
    Anonymous Member Posts: 1,376
    edited June 2014

    MUST READ THE COURAGE OF THIS WOMAN, Saba Ahmed. Listen to the words we can hear. 

    With a warning: don't google Ms Gabriel on a full stomach.
    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

    Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:58:17 -0400
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milban...
    W.Post
    Heritage’s ugly Benghazi panel

    Dana Milbank
    June 16 at 7:07 PM
    1477 Reader Comments
    Representatives of prominent conservative groups converged on the Heritage Foundation on Monday afternoon for the umpteenth in a series of gatherings to draw attention to the Benghazi controversy.
    But this one took an unexpected turn.

    What began as a session purportedly about “unanswered questions” surrounding the September 2012 attacks on U.S. facilities in Libya deteriorated into the ugly taunting of a woman in the room who wore an Islamic head covering.

    The session, as usual, quickly moved beyond the specifics of the assaults that left four Americans dead to accusations about the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrating the Obama administration, President Obama funding jihadists in their quest to destroy the United States, Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton attempting to impose Sharia blasphemy laws on Americans and Al Jazeera America being an organ of “enemy propaganda.”

    Then Saba Ahmed, an American University law student, stood in the back of the room and asked a question in a soft voice. “We portray Islam and all Muslims as bad, but there’s 1.8 billion followers of Islam,” she told them. “We have 8 million-plus Muslim Americans in this country and I don’t see them represented here.”

    Panelist Brigitte Gabriel of a group called ACT! for America pounced. She said “180 million to 300 million” Muslims are “dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization.” She told Ahmed that the “peaceful majority were irrelevant” in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and she drew a Hitler comparison: “Most Germans were peaceful, yet the Nazis drove the agenda and as a result, 60 million died.”

    “Are you an American?” Gabriel demanded of Ahmed, after accusing her of taking “the limelight” and before informing her that her “political correctness” belongs “in the garbage.”

    “Where are the others speaking out?” Ahmed was asked. This drew an extended standing ovation from the nearly 150 people in the room, complete with cheers.

    The panel’s moderator, conservative radio host Chris Plante, grinned and joined in the assault. “Can you tell me who the head of the Muslim peace movement is?” he demanded of Ahmed.

    “Yeah,” audience members taunted, “yeah.”

    Ahmed answered quietly, as before. “I guess it’s me right now,” she said.

    Plante had kicked off the forum by lamenting a “news media that is spectacularly uncurious when it comes to even the basic bare-bones facts of what happened in Benghazi that night.” But the hour that followed showed exactly why Americans (or at least the non-Fox-News-viewing subset of Americans) are rightly skeptical: The accusers’ allegations grow wilder by the day.

    Plante cast doubt on whether Ambassador Chris Stevens really died of smoke inhalation, demanding to see an autopsy report.

    Gabriel floated the notion that Stevens had been working on a weapons-swap program between Libya and Syria just before he was killed.

    Panelist Clare Lopez of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi said the perpetrators of the attack are “sipping frappes with journalists in juice bars.”

    One questioner said he had heard that Gen. Carter Ham, then-commander of U.S. Africa Command, had been “placed under house arrest” at the time of the Benghazi attack. “I’ve heard the same story,” Plante seconded.

    Another questioner, claiming to be from a Web site called GodSaveUSA.com, asked about an assertion that Obama “watched our people die” in real-time drone footage from Benghazi.

    Heritage hosted Monday’s gathering in conjunction with the Benghazi Accountability Coalition, a federation coordinated by Andrew McCarthy (prosecutor of the Blind Sheik, Omar Abdel Rahman) and including 15 groups such as Heritage, Judicial Watch and the Traditional Values Coalition. McCarthy’s talk to the gathering was titled “Just the Facts” — but the facts never had a chance against all the groups’ self-promotion (“Go to BenghaziCoalition.org” and “You need to be on our mailing list”) and anti-Islamist rhetoric that too often sounded just anti-Islam.

    Panelist Frank Gaffney revived allegations that former Clinton aide Huma Abedin has “deep personal” ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and said she may have advocated for laws against “Sharia blasphemy.” Gaffney also said the president’s view that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” is “a statement you could have found on al-Qaeda’s Web site.”

    But it was Gabriel, a Lebanese Christian by birth, who was most vitriolic when Ahmed asked her question. Gabriel dismissed as “irrelevant” the “2.3 million Arab Muslims living in the United States [when] it took 19 hijackers — 19 radicals — to bring America down.” She mocked Ahmed’s “point about peaceful, moderate Muslims” by making quotation marks with her fingers when she said the word peaceful.

    The young woman responded calmly to the taunts of the panelists and the crowd. “As a peaceful American Muslim,” she told them, “I would like to think I’m not that irrelevant.”

  • gardengumby
    gardengumby Member Posts: 7,305
    edited June 2014

    I am fervently against ANY more US involvement in ANY war unless the draft is reinstated - with NO exceptions.  These folks who are so fast to send our troops to war need to have some skin (literally) in the game.  Maybe then they'll tone down some of their rhetoric.

  • RetiredLibby
    RetiredLibby Member Posts: 1,992
    edited June 2014


    I just posted that above, Sunflowers.  It bears repeating, though.

    The brutal insurgent movement in Iraq, ISIS, contains what was formerly Al Qaeda in Iraq ... a movement that DID NOT EXIST until Bush the Lesser invaded Iraq and created it.  You wanna blame someone for the disintegration of the Middle East?  Bush built that.

     

  • Anonymous
    Anonymous Member Posts: 1,376
    edited June 2014

    RL - was so inflamed, didn't realize you'd already published it.

    Working now to get it reprinted in other papers

  • Anonymous
    Anonymous Member Posts: 1,376
    edited June 2014

    THERE CAN NOT BE ANOTHER "WAR"

    THERE.  CAN. NOT.  WE.  WILL. NOT. BE. DRAWN. IN. AGAIN.

    SYKES-PICOT.

    Current "borders" are NOT THE NATURAL BORDERS OF THAT PART OF THE WORLD.  THEY WERE IMPOSED BY THE WESTERN COUNTRIES TO GET ACCESS TO THE OIL.

    YES, I AM YELLING.  ;(

  • RetiredLibby
    RetiredLibby Member Posts: 1,992
    edited June 2014


    http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/06/17/video-heritage-foundations-benghazi-panelists-m/199750

    For people with strong stomachs, here is a video clip of that hateful "person" berating the Muslim woman.  I need a shower now.

     

  • IllinoisLady
    IllinoisLady Member Posts: 29,082
    edited June 2014

    The same people ( too many of them anyway ) who think we should get re-involved in war are the same ones who are joyfully cutting away benefits and medical attentions, even willing to leave an American soldier to rot  in Iran.  I find them all horrendous but must say Lindsey Graham looks so clumsily stupid and pathetic.  They seem to not care in the least whether their is truth ---just use it to inflame and incite.  Yes, their dollar signs are showing and it is not pretty.  Just about as ugly as there WMD leaders at the time.  Blathering dangerous fools that are carrying that horrible infection further.  Obviously some people have no idea what shame is and how it looks.  If only they could look in the mirror.

    Jackie 

  • RetiredLibby
    RetiredLibby Member Posts: 1,992
    edited June 2014

    Breaking news from today's WaPo:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-captured-benghazi-suspect-in-secret-raid/2014/06/17/7ef8746e-f5cf-11e3-a3a5-42be35962a52_story.html?hpid=z1

    Washington Post

    U.S.captures Benghazi suspect in secret raid

    By Karen DeYoung, Adam Goldman and Julie Tate  June 17 at 11:19 AM

    U.S. Special Operations forces captured one of the suspected ringleaders of the terrorist attacks in Benghazi in a secret raid in Libya over the weekend, the first time one of the accused perpetrators of the 2012 assault has been apprehended, according to U.S. officials.

    The officials said Ahmed Abu Khattala was captured near Benghazi by American troops, working alongside the FBI, following months of planning, and was now in U.S. custody “in a secure location outside Libya.” The officials said there were no casualties in the operation, and that all U.S. personnel involved have safely left Libya.

    Khattala’s apprehension is a major victory for the Obama administration, which has been criticized for having failed so far to bring those responsible for the Benghazi attacks to justice.

    One jubilant official called Khattala’s capture “a reminder that when the United States says it’s going to hold someone accountable and he will face justice, this is what we mean.”

    The Washington Post learned about the capture Monday but agreed to a request from the White House to delay publication of a story because of security concerns.

    Last year, the U.S. Attorney in the District filed charges against Khattala and at least a dozen others in connection with the Benghazi attacks. None besides Khattala — who is expected to be arraigned in Washington — has been apprehended.

    Officials, speaking on condition of anonymity about the still-secret operation, would not say where Khattala was being held. They said he was “en route” to the United States, but would not say when he was expected to arrive.

    Several terrorist suspects abducted overseas have been held aboard U.S. naval ships at sea while being interrogated, after which they were turned over to FBI “clean teams” to question them for trial without endangering the admissibility of evidence.

    The State Department designated Khattala a terrorist in January, calling him a “senior leader” of the Benghazi branch of the militant organization Ansar al-Sharia, a group that arose after the 2010 fall of the Libyan regime of Moammar Gaddafi.

    Ansar al-Sharia was also designated a terrorist organization and held specifically responsible for the Sept. 11, 2012, assault on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi that left U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens and State Department security official Sean Smith dead.

    Two CIA contractors, Tyrone S. Woods and Glen Doherty, were killed in a mortar attack at a nearby CIA annex where the attackers moved after overtaking the diplomatic compound.

    Officials who confirmed Khattala’s capture declined to comment on whether others were apprehended with him, or to describe the specific military or law enforcement units that were involved. Last October, commandos from the Army’s elite Delta Force, along with members of the FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team, carried out a similar raid in Tripoli, the Libyan capital, and abducted Nazih Abdul-Hamed al-Ruqai,who is accused of participating in the 1998 bombings of U.S. Embassies in East Africa.

    Ruqai, also known as Anas al-Libi, is currently awaiting trial in New York.

    A plan to grab Khattala days after Ruqai’s capture was postponed because of violent uprisings against the Libyan government, which had approved the abductions. Asked whether Libya had approved the Sunday abduction, a U.S. official said: “I am not going to get into the specifics of our diplomatic discussions, but to be clear: This was a unilateral U.S. operation.”

    “We have made clear to successive Libyan governments our intention to bring to justice the perpetrators of the attack on our facilities in Benghazi,” the official said. “So it should come as no surprise to the Libyan government that we would take advantage of an opportunity to bring Abu Khatalla to face justice.”

    Following the October raid, the FBI feared it had missed its best opportunity to arrest Khattala.

    Shortly after the Benghazi attacks, FBI agents in New York, which has territorial responsibility for Africa, began working with federal prosecutors there, although the case was subsequently moved without explanation to the U.S. Attorney’s office for the District.

    Failure to make arrests in the Benghazi case was seen as an enormous frustration for the FBI, and a subject of sharp criticism from lawmakers. Within weeks of the attacks, and sporadically thereafter, Khattala was interviewed by American reporters in the open in Benghazi, where he said he did not participate in the initial assault on the Benghazi compound but came on the scene as it was ending.

    In a June 11 hearing before the House Judiciary Committee, FBI Director James Comey testified: “I take the Benghazi matter very, very seriously. It is one that I am very close to—briefed on a regular basis. One we are putting a lot of work into and that we’ve made progress on.”

    “One thing you’ve got to know about the FBI, we never give up,” Comey said. “So sometimes things take longer than we’d like them to, but they never go into an inactive bin.”

    Believed to be in his 40s, Khattala was imprisoned for many years by the Gaddafi regime for his Islamic views.

    The FBI believes other groups were also involved in the Benghazi attacks and is pursuing criminal charges against several individuals, including Abu Sufian bin Qumu, the leader of Ansar al-Sharia in the Libyan city of Darnah. Qumu has also been designated a terrorist by the State Department, as has his group.

    In 2007, Qumu was released from the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and sent to Libya, where he was detained. Gaddafi’s government released him in 2008. (emphasis mine - note when he was released from Gitmo - DURING BUSH THE LESSER'S PRESIDENCY).  Had Bush the Lesser kept him in prison, would Chris Stevens be alive today?  I'm just sayin ...

    The Benghazi attacks and their aftermath have been the subject of ongoing controversy. A volatile political issue, Benghazi has already influenced initial skirmishing over the 2016 presidential election, particularly for Hillary Rodham Clinton, President Obama’s secretary of state at the time of the attacks.

    Republicans have charged the White House with failing to secure the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, attempting to cover up what actually occurred on the night of the attacks, and mishandling the subsequent investigation. After numerous hearings and an official State Department review, a select committee has been set up in the House of Representatives to investigate further.

    ----------------------------------------------------

    So, of course the Reichwing will refuse to give the Obama Administration credit, just like they won't give the President credit for ordering the capture/killing of Bin Laden.  But I'm just going to call them out on this - if they say that President Obama didn't have anything to do with this suspect's capture, they are stupid.  S-T-U-P-I-D.  I'm just tired of the stupid.

  • kayfh
    kayfh Member Posts: 790
    edited June 2014

    Could the members of the press re-learn how to research, how to connect with what has happened before and-remember that all of us, the great unwashed, have memories, and if we have memory lapses, we have computers, tablets and phones, we have books?  We don't wake up each date brand new and believe what ever they decide to feed us.  Just as the people in Egypt, Iraq, Syria. Also wake up with memories intact.  But with the threat of annihilation ever looming.

    You know, GG has a good point.  Why is it that our comedians have no fear of skewering our leader political and corporate, pointing out their inconsistencies, lapses, failures, and sometimes even their successes?  Actually the weirder they are, the better the fodder for the comedians.  If they took good, honest, workmanlike actions, working for the COMMON GOOD, maybe comedy, as we know and love it, would cease to exist.

    I could learn to adapt to a new paradigm.  

  • IllinoisLady
    IllinoisLady Member Posts: 29,082
    edited June 2014
  • kayfh
    kayfh Member Posts: 790
    edited June 2014

    Darn, we posted at the same time

  • Bren-2007
    Bren-2007 Member Posts: 6,241
    edited June 2014


    Hi Buds,

    GG ... ThumbsUpThumbsUp Two thumbs up!

    Kay ... Thinking about you today.

    Sunnyflowers ... Absolutely agree.  We cannot go back into Iraq.  I remember when Desert Storm began under Bush Sr. and how scary that was.  Then Baby Bush just had to make up lies to get us involved in Iraq.

    Blue ... Thinking about you today.  I hope your pain is manageable and you have good mobility today.

    Just came in from walking the dogs and mowing.  I managed to get two lower fields done before it hit 90 this morning.  I just hope I didn't get any ticks on me.  Mowing under and around the pine and oak trees sucks.

    I saw another job posting for a psych transcriptionist ... was about to apply but noticed they also want someone who is familiar with oncology.  I wonder if I could fake my way in.  I've learned a lot about oncology in the last 7 years dealing with lots of different cancers in my family.

    hugs,

    Bren

  • bluedahlia
    bluedahlia Member Posts: 6,944
    edited June 2014

    Bren, thank you for the card!  Made my day.

  • bluedahlia
    bluedahlia Member Posts: 6,944
    edited June 2014

    Libby, I blame Obama for EVERYTHING.  It's his fault, EVERYTHING!  Even when I get constipated, IT'S HIS FAULT!

  • kayfh
    kayfh Member Posts: 790
    edited June 2014

    Bren. I would expect that a transcriptionist who had familiarity with medical terminology, abbreviations etc.  which you do, could learn, fairly easily, anything that you don't know.  And you do have 'lived' experience.  I would say yes, identify yourself as a psych transcriptionist, who is well rounded, versed in medical technology, With Lived Experience, as opposed to formal training and or experience in oncology.  Very quick to learn .

Categories