Moe Lane

…and that is a legitimate ‘if:’ anyway, if it turns out that Broadwell’s revelation last month is correct and that Benghazi was hosting a secret jail* for the purpose of extraordinary rendition then I hope that people will find the following posts to be useful.

• 01/21/2009. There’s a phrase missing from this Washington Times report on detainee policy.
• 01/28/2009. Obama’s Rendition Exception.
• 02/01/2009. Obama embraces torture.
• 02/02/2009. The nuance of the pro-torture Left (HRW edition).
• 02/08/2009. Greenwald, Sullivan’s faux-outrage over rendition.

(more…)

Having a good morning? This will fix it.

Via Hot Air. Summary: the consulate warned their higher ups of the imminent attack, noted that their own Libyan security detachment was acting questionably, and reported that militia forces would likely be involved. And, relatedly, military intelligence was reporting that this was an organized terrorist attack within hours of the attack. So why the delay in the government admitting it? Fox News didn’t say why here, but I will: it’s because if the government admitted that it was Islamist terrorism, it would have stepped on their narrative that Islamist terrorism was in full retreat ever since Osama bin Laden was killed. So the government did nothing.

And good men died.

Don’t watch this if you have high blood pressure.

I’ll save you time: when directly and explicitly asked Were [our targeted personnel in Benghazi] denied requests for help during the attack? the President refused to answer no.  The CIA’s already said no, in that special way that Beltway types have to tacitly point to who might have said ‘yes’: “No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”  Which is why The Weekly Standard titled their post “Petraeus Throws Obama Under the Bus.”  Because Petraeus did.

There are no words.  Just get out there and vote.

Moe Lane

(more…)

(Via email) You know what the most damning thing is about this NYT tacit admission that the Obama administration is now seen as a weak horse in the Middle East?

Witnesses and the authorities have called Ahmed Abu Khattala one of the ringleaders of the Sept. 11 attack on the American diplomatic mission here. But just days after President Obama reasserted his vow to bring those responsible to justice, Mr. Abu Khattala spent two leisurely hours on Thursday evening at a crowded luxury hotel, sipping a strawberry frappe on a patio and scoffing at the threats coming from the American and Libyan governments.

It’s the correction:

An earlier version of this article described incorrectly a beverage that Ahmed Abu Khattala was drinking at a hotel in Benghazi, Libya. It was a strawberry frappe, not mango juice, which is what he had ordered.

(more…)

What am I saying?  Of course you do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yuQY4zl_ank

Kinda-sorta via AoSHQ.  Ingraham is not particularly on my radar – honestly, I don’t really watch or listen to many television/radio pundits, except as necessary to do the blogs – but she was kind of ruthless, here.  For those without video, she pointed out to the NYT guy’s face that his paper was a hypocrite for not covering the Benghazi lying/incompetence/whatever with nearly the same recklessly fevered  enthusiasm that the Media did over, say, Plamegate.  Good stuff, and nicely concentrated down into a reasonably pure form.

She also happens to be right.

You know, you read this Washington Post article on the assassination of Ambassador Stevens, and you keep telling yourself This movie is completely unbelievable.

On the eve of his death, U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens was ebullient as he returned for the first time in his new role to Benghazi, the eastern Libyan city that embraced him as a savior during last year’s civil war. He moved around the coastal town in an armored vehicle and held a marathon of meetings, his handful of bodyguards trailing discreetly behind.

Sure, that’s a great image for the cameras – some good distance and local shots for the film; quick shorthand for ‘this guy is important and influential’ for folks in the streets – but there’s no way that a real-life administration would just let one of its Ambassadors surrender so much control over his security. It’s just easier to defend a static area, and bring people to the meetings whenever possible. They’ll understand: real life ain’t Hollywood. (more…)

Let me start this by saying the obvious: I am not on Senator McCain’s Christmas card list; he is not on mine; and we’re both no doubt very happy about that.  But as the above quote in the title shows, he is sound on the self-evident absurdity of believing that the assassination of our Ambassador to Libya (and his staffers) was anything except a pre-planned assassination by terrorist groups:

Honestly, the outside world is not your Xbox.  People do not wander around with heavy weapons, waiting for the right moment of social disorder to set them off.  Doing so causes talk.

Moe Lane

PS: Every Republican politician and pundit knows this instinctively.  Even those of us who never served in the military.  That it took the Obama administration so long to work this out for themselves is profoundly… diagnostic.

Who.
Was.
It?

Let me summarize this bombshell from the Daily Beast – and yes, the term ‘bombshell’ qualifies:

Within 24 hours of the 9-11 anniversary attack on the United States consulate in Benghazi, U.S. intelligence agencies had strong indications al Qaeda–affiliated operatives were behind the attack, and had even pinpointed the location of one of those attackers. 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.

If this is true, then one of two things happened: either UN Ambassador Susan Rice lied to the American people the Sunday after the attack… (more…)

You may have noticed a little while back that the US Embassy in Cairo called out the Egyptian government/Muslim Brotherhood for saying one thing in English (read: Western foreign consumption) and another in Arabic (read: domestic/regional consumption).  Which is all to the good… so why did the President do the same thing this week?

The View: “In an interview with ABC’s “The View,” Obama — who is in New York to address the United Nations General Assembly — was asked if the Benghazi assault was indeed terrorism.  “There’s no doubt that the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn’t just a mob action,” Obama said.”

Obama’s UN speech: “In every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening; in every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask how much they are willing to tolerate freedom for others. That is what we saw play out the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.”

…Annnnd that’s pretty much everything that the President had to say at the UN as to why we are having ongoing riots in the Middle East in the first place: it’s all because of that video. Oh, sure, the President admitted that Iran funds terrorist groups; but he knows, you know, and I know that the Benghazi attack (and probably the triggering riots*) were started up by an al-Qaeda affiliate (read: Sunni), while Iran prefers to work through groups like Hezbollah (read: Shi’ite). Which most of the people at the UN know, too – so yeah, they’re getting a message loud and clear, and it’s this: Barack Obama doesn’t want to look too closely at existing terror networks in the Middle East. (more…)

Apparently the population of Benghazi isn’t very happy with the Ansar Al-Sharia militia right now.

Witnesses say supporters of Ansar al-Sharia lined up outside its headquarters, in front of the crowd, waving black and white banners.

They fired into the air to try to disperse the protesters, but fled with their weapons after the base was surrounded by waves of people shouting “no to militias”.

(Via World Affairs, via Instapundit) Three people were killed elsewhere: this seems to be also tied up with a general desire of Libyans to get rid of the militia groups in general.  The military itself seems to be kind of split, with some elements of it assisting the mobs and some elements protecting select militia groups.  And that’s about all that I really know about the situation itself.  Not that I’m unhappy to see an Islamist terrorist group cut and run, of course. (more…)

Via Instapundit and Iowahawk:

Come, I will conceal nothing from you: yesterday, I thought that this ‘flag’ deserved nothing more than a zombie joke. But then, I I had not made the connection with the images of our diplomatic staff likely being dragged off to their deaths. Kind of spoils the jest, that.

They need to stop selling that flag.  People should certainly not put it up on their walls.

You may be wondering why the Obama administration (in the guise of UN Ambassador Susan Rice) is claiming that last week’s protests and murders in the Middle East were spontaneous, ad hoc exhibitions of ire against an obscure anti-Islamic YouTube movie, despite the fact that the Libyan government itself is saying that the aforementioned murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens and members of his staff was part of a “precalculated, preplanned attack” by a terrorist group.  After all, not only is the latter explanation the more believable one (disorganized rioters rarely bring rocket-propelled grenade launchers to spontaneous demonstrations); it’s frankly the less insulting one, given that the administration is essentially taking the position that it’s reasonable to expect Muslims to bring rocket-propelled grenade launchers to spontaneous demonstrations.  And yet there Ambassador Rice is there, busily embarrassing herself all over the television – and with the pitying disapproval of her peers, too.

What’s going on?

Sheer pragmatism.  A clumsy lie beats admitting to eight years of hypocrisy, you see. (more…)