The Largest Hole

[Flanders]

I don’t mean the largest ass-hole. There are so many in the current Administration it would take a platoon of proctologists to determine the winner. My title refers to the Benghazi coverup. I’ll begin at the beginning.

Benghazi is a perversion of President Truman firing General MacArthur in that there is a major rift between civilian authority and military responsibilities. Both sides of the Truman/MacArthur conflict were clear. Most Americans at the time agreed that Truman had the authority to fire MacArthur even though many believed he should not have done it. One thing was clear to everyone. Both men were doing what they thought was best for the country. Not so with Benghazi.

By not sending military help to Americans under attack Hussein & Company misused the military in pursuit of their global government agenda. They refuse to admit that America is at war against Islamic fundamentalism; so they try to appease all Muslims at America’s expense. Reason: They fear Muslim countries will walk out of the United Nations en mass. The very thought of standing up to Islam’s jihad never occurs to them.

HELP!

Note that the Clinton co-presidency never hesitated when it came to sending help to Muslims in the Balkans by bombing Christians; so Hillary’s refusal to send help to Americans under attack in Benghazi is no surprise:

Dempsey then said that a contingent was not sent because the State Department didn't request one.

"So it's the State Department's fault," McCain challenged.

"I'm not blaming the State Department," Dempsey responded. "I'm sure they had their own assessment."

Dempsey said he stood by the conclusion of an independent review board, which concluded the "interagency response was timely and appropriate, but there simply was not enough time, given the speed of the attacks, for armed U.S. military assets to have made a difference."

Panetta, Dempsey defend U.S. response to Benghazi attack
By Ashley Fantz, CNN
updated 9:07 PM EST, Thu February 7, 2013

Panetta, Dempsey defend U.S. response to Benghazi attack - CNN.com

McCain literally forced Dempsey to say "I'm not blaming the State Department, . . .". Of course he was. If not the State Department it had to be the intelligence community or the military establishment.

The intelligence community controlled by Democrats would naturally not bat an eye while watching Americans die, but the scariest scenario of all is the one where the top brass in America’s military culture has finally signed on to the Democrat party’s anti-sovereignty, pro-global government agenda administered by the United Nations. Since 1945 UN-loving Democrats have been working to replace top military leaders loyal to this country with military leaders who believe in global government. They’ve succeeded. As I’ve said in the past:

The federal government and the US military have been thoroughly infiltrated by the very type of person the country was warned about in the Army-McCarthy hearings (1954). Unfortunately, one type of infiltrator escaped detection until recently. Nobody, myself included, separated hardcore Communists from global government traitors who might not be Communists.

There is ample evidence that the three branches of government were infiltrated by hardcore Communists and global government traitors, while few Americans realize that many staff officers in every branch of the armed services are more loyal to the United Nations than they are to the US Constitution.

I have to admit that I was never able to determine if global government traitors in the military constitute the majority. Benghazi indicates their is a serious conflict between loyal officers and global government officers. The following video is worth posting ONE MORE TIME because two of the players are up to their necks in the Benghazi coverup:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUhYX6Crsa4&feature=player_embedded]Def Secretary Panetta tells Senator Sessions U.S. military gets authority from UN or NATO.flv - YouTube[/ame]​

Also, let me repeat how they get away treason:

In addition to the United States International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945, the sneaks who got this country into the UN knew what they were doing when they designed a foundation that was a masterpiece of betrayal. A foundation that would withstand every challenge when their descendants carried on. Treason became legal the minute the US became a member of an underhanded organization that was, and is, determined to tear down America. Membership in the UN meant that no American official betraying this country on the UN’s behalf could be prosecuted for treason. Only lawyers could design something like that.

Stand-down

The order to stand-down permeates the aftermath of the Benghazi attack. Stand-down means “A withdrawal, as of a military presence.” Somebody sure as hell withdrew (RETREATED) in Benghazi before the battle was lost. So who should Hussein fire if the order to stand-down did NOT originate with him? Answer: The originator of the stand-down order.

McInerney said the tell-tale sign of Obama’s dereliction of duty can be determined in the admitted White House narrative of the president’s actions as the terrorist attack played out the night of Sept. 11, 2012.

“When is the exact minute he knew? We don’t have the timeline, and it was well before the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff went over there. He only talked to the secretary of defense one time, so it’s obvious he knew that he had given the stand-down order and did not need to talk to the secretary of defense or anybody else after that,” McInerney said.

XXXXX​

He also insists the stand-down order could only come from one source: the president himself.

“The only person who could have given it was the president, and he had to give it through the secretary of defense, secretary of state. The word came out so it came from the combatant commands and other unites below, but nobody could have given that except the president of the United States, . . .”.

While he believes Obama has a lot to answer for, McInerney made it clear that many top-level subordinates deserve a lot of the blame too, and that’s what makes the scandal so troubling.

XXXXX​

The general also singled out former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her comment at congressional hearings in January in which she bristled severely at accusations the administration concocted a plan to blame the attack on a spontaneous demonstration over an anti-Islam YouTube video that got out of hand. Clinton slammed Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, saying, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

McInerney sees that as a low point in American history.

“That is one of the most despicable statements that any American has said about such a tragic incident when you lose people like that.”

General McInerney goes on to say:

McInerney said the administration’s story is full of holes on a number of fronts,. . .

Benghazi makes Watergate 'look like kindergarten'
General: 'A dereliction of duty this nation has never seen before'
Published: 14 hours ago

Benghazi makes Watergate ?look like kindergarten?

Now let’s address the Grand Canyon of holes.

Nobody knew how long the men under attack could hold out, nor did anybody know if the attackers would logically assume that help was surely on the way and back off. So how can anybody in the Administration say that help would NOT have arrived in time to do any good?

Finally, I believe that Hussein & Company now realize the hole in their story is too large to close. The question is: How come Senate and House Committees are not asking about the largest hole?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I heard one democrat mention it was a standby order not a stand down order. Can you imagine watching that Benghazi horror show happening in the situation room live and their answer was stand by? Stand by for what? Stand by until they are all dead? Apparently. The order was Stand Down. Not stand by. To think anyone would even believe such a flimsy story is incredible, Flanders.

Let me ask you something concerning the first part of your thread. What about the Logan Act? Clearly it is was against the law to ever come up with such an agreement because it explicitly forbids ANY NGO including the UN from direct involvment with any person in office - discussing govt. business, decisions, etc. It is forbidden. So how could it have been bypassed as you say? The Logan Act predates the International Immunities act you mention here. - Jeri

 

[Flanders]

I heard one democrat mention it was a standby order not a stand down order.

Let me ask you something concerning the first part of your thread. What about the Logan Act? Clearly it is was against the law to ever come up with such an agreement because it explicitly forbids ANY NGO including the UN from direct involvment with any person in office - discussing govt. business, decisions, etc. It is forbidden. So how could it have been bypassed as you say? The Logan Act predates the International Immunities act you mention here. - Jeri

To Jeri: Everything I’ve read and heard said it was a stand-down order.

And I believe the Logan Act forbids “unauthorized” Americans from negotiating with foreign governments. To the best of my knowledge no one has ever been charged with violating the Logan Act. John Kerry should have been the first:

For example, as the nation became well aware during the course of the 2004 election, John Kerry has probably violated the Logan Act before, and possibly other laws that make it a crime to negotiate with enemies of the United States.

The script of the famously hard hitting Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad on the subject recaps the story better than I could:

Even before Jane Fonda went to Hanoi to meet with the enemy and mock America, John Kerry secretly met with enemy leaders in Paris, though we were still at war and Americans were being held in North Vietnamese prisons camps.​

Kerry’s Logan Act
By Patrick Hynes on 1.20.05 @ 12:07AM

The American Spectator : Kerry's Logan Act

Democrats violating the Logan Act will never be prosecuted. In any event, membership in the United Nations overrides American law whenever the UN is involved. Try to imagine anybody in government being arrested for treason for anything they do in the name of the UN. It ain’t going to happen. Bottom line: Membership in the UN made treason legal irrespective of America’s laws, oaths of office, and the Constitution.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I will have to go back and read the Logan Act but I was under the impression it was meant to keep non governmental agencies out of American Government affairs. That would have to include the UN, CFR, TRI - LAT, Bilderberg and the rest. You are correct, Flanders. The Logan Act has never been enforced which leads me to ask why? Why has it never been enforced?

 

[Flanders]

I will have to go back and read the Logan Act but I was under the impression it was meant to keep non governmental agencies out of American Government affairs. That would have to include the UN, CFR, TRI - LAT, Bilderberg and the rest. You are correct, Flanders. The Logan Act has never been enforced which leads me to ask why? Why has it never been enforced?

To Jeri: My guess as to why a law written in 1799 was never enforced is that it cannot be adapted to cover the entities you cite.

Here’s something that might interest you:

If anyone were to take the time to read the Federal Register of Laws, in which all laws passed by Congress are recorded since its first session in 1789, and they read an average of 700 pages per week, it would take them over 25,000 years to read them all, a feat impossible in multiple lifetimes.

This number becomes even more daunting every two years, since Congress passes an average of 2,000 bills into law during each session.

Are all Laws Necessary?
By Matt Shipley Thursday, May 9, 2013

Are all Laws Necessary?

Question: How many laws dealing with treason were abolished so to speak by membership in the United Nations —— while the rest of them still stand?

 

[Oldguy]

Benghazi seems to be an "issue" wholly manufactured out of thin air by FOX "news" for no other reason than to bash Obama. They're the only ones pushing it.

Oh, yeah....that's because the "MSM" is just totally communist to the core. Right? LOL

ps: Why isn't this in the political forums?

 

[bornright]

Benghazi seems to be an "issue" wholly manufactured out of thin air by FOX "news" for no other reason than to bash Obama. They're the only ones pushing it.

Oh, yeah....that's because the "MSM" is just totally communist to the core. Right? LOL

ps: Why isn't this in the political forums?

I watched it on CSPAN and you should have. You would probably think differently had you seen their testimony. All the answers still have not come out yet. I am sure that we will have the opportunity to have more hearings on this matter. It is very important to me and I think many others.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I will have to go back and read the Logan Act but I was under the impression it was meant to keep non governmental agencies out of American Government affairs. That would have to include the UN, CFR, TRI - LAT, Bilderberg and the rest. You are correct, Flanders. The Logan Act has never been enforced which leads me to ask why? Why has it never been enforced?

To Jeri: My guess as to why a law written in 1799 was never enforced is that it cannot be adapted to cover the entities you cite.

Here’s something that might interest you:

If anyone were to take the time to read the Federal Register of Laws, in which all laws passed by Congress are recorded since its first session in 1789, and they read an average of 700 pages per week, it would take them over 25,000 years to read them all, a feat impossible in multiple lifetimes.

This number becomes even more daunting every two years, since Congress passes an average of 2,000 bills into law during each session.

Are all Laws Necessary?
By Matt Shipley Thursday, May 9, 2013

Are all Laws Necessary?

Question: How many laws dealing with treason were abolished so to speak by membership in the United Nations —— while the rest of them still stand?

I looked it up. They amended it in 1994, Flanders, but I cannot find the details. It is still on the books and if it is to private citizens only then one should question those with memberships to Bilderberg, CFR and tri - lat who have never been arrested. They are most certainly in violation of the Logan Act. - Jeri

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

On the subject of laws. I love what Congressman Larry McDonald said once... he said, Does anyone wake up in the morning wishing they had bigger government, more restrictions and regulations over their lives? Wishing for higher taxes? Less freedom, more debt? Who would wish for that?

Only a progressive liberal.

 

[Oldguy]

Benghazi seems to be an "issue" wholly manufactured out of thin air by FOX "news" for no other reason than to bash Obama. They're the only ones pushing it.

Oh, yeah....that's because the "MSM" is just totally communist to the core. Right? LOL

ps: Why isn't this in the political forums?

I watched it on CSPAN and you should have. You would probably think differently had you seen their testimony. All the answers still have not come out yet. I am sure that we will have the opportunity to have more hearings on this matter. It is very important to me and I think many others.

C-SPAN simply covers the workings of Congress. It has no political agenda, so the fact they are covering the hearings means nothing more than that their editors think it would b interesting to their viewers.

 

[Oldguy]

Interestingly, FOX News Latino isn't covering the hearings at all, at least not that I could find and for sure not prominently.

Politics | Fox News Latino

Hmmmmmm. I wonder why? Is it because Latino's aren't interested in such things?

Or....could it be that FOX's "reporting" of the Benghazi hearings are only targeted at the GOP's largest and most important demographic: Angry white males. Ya think?

 

[Flanders]

Here’s some good news:

Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., said House Republicans are trying to get the basic information to lay groundwork for more hearings.

XXXXX​

“This is the first time we’re hearing the inside information about what actually happened in Benghazi,” Bachmann said.

She added that the investigation so far “failed to question the right people, and the conclusions are not conclusions that can yield any significant results.”

“We’re only getting started,” she said.

GOP sets groundwork for more Benghazi questions
Congresswoman promises, 'We're only getting started'
Published: 13 hours ago
TAYLOR ROSE

GOP sets groundwork for more Benghazi questions

Hussein & Company are sinking in lies the media can’t pooh-pooh away. Worst of all they all know that the prospect of losing their investment in Hillary Clinton is very real. Were she a stock traded on the New York Stock Exchange her value would be plummeting. Further congressional hearings are sure to trigger panic selling when Wall Street Bulls decide to cut their losses.

Frankly, I think a change in the terminology is called for. Instead of implying a shoddy political coverup engineered solely to shield a few cheapjacks at the top, I’d like to see Congress go after the foreign policy Hussein & Company are hiding. The public would be better-served if media nomenclature said “foreign policy coverup” instead of the one word “coverup.” Coverup implies Watergate and covering up Clinton-type sex scandals. Benghazi is far more serious than that.

The Youtube video I posted in the OP is a good start. A Senate Committee can call Leon Panetta and General Dempsey. That will give Senator Sessions the opportunity to ask them about the B.S. they laid down on how the military should be used. Perhaps the next time they won’t testify with the smug arrogance so common among UN-loving traitors about non-existent International law. The question should be: Was your interpretation of International law part of the decision to cut and run before the fight was lost?

There is one more thing that involves Michele Bachmann. If you listen to the video at the link note that Muslim Keith Ellison refers to Communists in the McCarthy Era, when, in fact, Senator McCarthy was proved right:

In a statement, Bachmann did not back down, saying she would "not be silent as this administration appeases our enemies" and saying she wants a full investigation into the Muslim Brotherhood.

July 19, 2012 8:21 AM
Michele Bachmann refuses to back down on claims about Huma Abedin
By Nancy Cordes

Michele Bachmann refuses to back down on claims about Huma Abedin - CBS News

The Arab Spring supports Michele’s concerns, but it would be difficult for her to bring up Hillary’s longtime aide while guys like John McCain are waiting to chop her off at the knees. For my own curiosity, I’d like somebody to ask Hillary Clinton if Huma Abedin was consulted about Benghazi. After all, that’s what top aides are for.

 

[Flanders]

Getting Hillary Clinton won’t be easy; nevertheless, let’s encourage the effort:

“I would hope that she would step up and help us out,” Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, replied when Charlie Rose asked him if he wants the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to subpoena Clinton. Chaffetz emphasized that the committee is not yet ready to issue such a summons, but noted that “we do have whistleblowers stepping up, [so] I think we’re going to get serious about forcing people legally to [testify].”

Chaffetz — sounding as if he wanted to avoid saying anything that would seem to vindicate critics who dismiss the current Benghazi investigation as a witch-hunt designed to hurt Clinton’s ability to win the presidency in 2016 — said that if Clinton will not voluntarily appear, then “at some point, yeah, I’ll be supportive of [a subpoena].”

Rep. Chaffetz: Hillary Clinton must testify again about Benghazi attacks
May 10, 2013 | 12:21 am
Joel Gehrke
Commentary Writer
The Washington Examiner

Rep. Chaffetz: Hillary Clinton must testify again about Benghazi attacks | WashingtonExaminer.com

I just don’t get this “. . . a witch-hunt designed to hurt Clinton’s ability to win the presidency in 2016 . . .”.

Why is it a witch-hunt to stop a piece of garbage more vile than Hussein? Ditto Joe Biden who lived in the same garbage dump longer than the other two, but nobody in the media says stopping him is a witch-hunt.

In any event, the Democrat party’s base will vote for their party’s candidate in the general election. So it’s fair play to try and convince that 15 or 20 percent “undecided” not to vote for Clinton in the general since Democrats made her the overwhelming favorite this far out.

There is nothing wrong with “getting” Hillary Clinton while searching for the truth about Benghazi. The fact is: Showing Clinton in her true light is the media definition of witch-hunt. It’s always about somebody else, never about what the Clintons are. Remember that she defended her degenerate husband with the phrase “Vast right-wing conspiracy.” Now, the media is dusting off the McCarthy era “witch-hunt” phrase as though lies are being told by her opponents. So far, the only lies I see are the ones she been telling since she was first lady.

Here’s a thought. Conservatives should tell the Democrats who their candidates should be. The media and the Democrats always pick the Republican party’s candidates. I suggest two inmates from Gitmo in 2016. The Democrat party’s rank & file would vote for them as quickly as they would vote for Clinton or Biden.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Benghazi seems to be an "issue" wholly manufactured out of thin air by FOX "news" for no other reason than to bash Obama. They're the only ones pushing it.

Oh, yeah....that's because the "MSM" is just totally communist to the core. Right? LOL

ps: Why isn't this in the political forums?

Your question should be why aren't the networks covering this so we can find out if there is any thing to it or not. Fact is we don't know if help could have made any difference or even made it worse depending on said helps timing. Unfortunately we'll not know this because help was not sent as it should have been.

US Marines should be on Guard at US Embassies and Consulates.........

 

[Flanders]

US Marines should be on Guard at US Embassies and Consulates.........

To SFC Ollie: I would add that Marine bases should be positioned within rapid response distance to every embassy and consulate in those Muslin countries that would declare war on the United States the minute they think they can win. Should those governments refuse our military permission to protect Americans —— withdraw our people and sever all diplomatic and economic ties. That includes denying those governments foreign aid of any kind.

Democrats are always wailing about using sanctions and diplomacy against Iran because of its nuclear weapons program. The fact is that terrorism as a military strategy is more effective than Iran joining the nuclear club. At least Iran can be wiped off the face of the earth should it attack America with WMD, while Islamic fundamentalism is being treated like a criminal enterprise.

Sanctions as a foreign policy tool should also apply to violence-prone countries —— ESPECIALLY those countries Hussein & Company handed to the Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab Spring.

 

[Flanders]

I guess this means Bill isn’t enjoying a good cigar with Huma: “Hillary considers her to be another daughter.”

Bill and Hillary Clinton will not support Anthony Weiner in his dream of becoming mayor even though they love his wife, Huma Abedin, sources say. “The Clintons wish Weiner would just disappear. Every time he pops up, it’s a reminder of Bill’s scandal with Monica Lewinsky, and it isn’t helpful to Hillary’s hopes for 2016,” one Democrat told Page Six. Abedin has worked for the former US senator and secretary of state for many years, and traveled with her as her “body woman,” her closest aide. It is believed that Abedin is still on the Clintons’ payroll although she isn’t working at the Clinton Foundation. Abedin will no doubt be one of Hillary’s first hires for her presidential campaign team. “The Clintons love Huma. She has a job for life, no matter how much of an embarrassment her husband is,” said our source. “Hillary considers her to be another daughter.”

Clintons freeze out Weiner
Last Updated: 12:17 AM, May 13, 2013
Posted: 12:14 AM, May 13, 2013

Bill and Hillary Clinton will not support Anthony Weiner?s return to politics, despite their love for Huma - NYPOST.com

 

[Flanders]

It doesn’t matter how much money Hillary Clinton’s gal pal earned moonlighting. The American public should be taking Michele Bachmann’s concern’s seriously. See #12 permalink.

Huma Abedin, left, a longtime confidante of Hillary Rodham Clinton.​

The State Department, under Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton, created an arrangement for her longtime aide and confidante Huma Abedin to work for private clients as a consultant while serving as a top adviser in the department.

Ms. Abedin did not disclose the arrangement — or how much income she earned — on her financial report.

Weiner’s Wife Didn’t Disclose Consulting Work She Did While Serving in State Dept.
By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
Published: May 16, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/n...g-work-done-while-a-state-dept-aide.html?_r=0

p.s. Do you think the IRS will ever audit Huma?

 

[Flanders]

The scandal cup runneth over. Were it not for the other scandals the media is covering Huma Abedin might have a chance to break through. When Michele Bachmann first made inquiries about Abedin the media treated Bachmann as if she was the scandal. Now the media is ignoring Huma Abedin completely in order to protect Hillary Clinton who can ill-afford to be splatted with more Middle East mud:

. . . Abedin is anything but a common government employee. While the mainstream media remains temporarily focused on Abedin’s role with regard to her husband’s political campaign, it remains calculatingly incurious about her work with the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation, and the tens of millions of dollars in donations it has received from such entities as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the governments of Kuwait and Qatar, Saudi businessman Nasser Al-Rashid, who has close ties to the Saudi royal family, Sheikh Mohammed H. Al-Amoudi, reputed to be one of the richest men in the world, and a group called Friends of Saudi Arabia and the Dubai Foundation.

XXXXX ​

During part of that time, Abedin had another job as well. From 1996-2008, she also worked as assistant editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA), a publication founded by Abdullah Omar Naseef.

Naseef was also secretary general of the Muslim World League in Saudi Arabia, a highly significant Muslim Brotherhood organization Osama Bin Laden once characterized as one of his terrorist group’s chief funding sources.

Using that connection, Naseef founded the Rabita Trust, a designated terrorist organization. In the late seventies, he hired Abedin’s parents to run his newly formed Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA). Editing its journal has remained a family enterprise to this day, and Naseef’s tenure as a member of the journal’s advisory editorial board, seven years of which coincided with Huma’s Abedin’s tenure there, lasted until 2003‚Äìthe same year he was named as a defendant in a civil case brought by victims of 9/11. Naseef was dropped from the suit in 2010, when a court decided it lacked jurisdiction over him.

Dr. Saleha Abedin, Huma’s mother, still edits the JMMA. She took over when Huma’s father, Syed Zainul Abedin, passed away. Both of Abedin’s parents, as well as her brother, Hassan Abedin, have deep, documented ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Furthermore, her mother runs the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child, which is part of yet another terror-designated organization known as the Union of Good.

It remains impossible to understand how Abedin received security clearance to work at the State Department, which allows her access to top-secret documents. Even if one makes the case that she should not be tainted by the dubious relationships maintained by her family members, it is impossible to disassociate her from her own relationship with Abdullah Omar Naseef and his organization.

More Secrets From Huma Abedin
By Arnold Ahlert Monday, May 20, 2013

More Secrets From Huma Abedin

Disregard every implication and the public should at least know whose name is on her security clearance and how the process worked in her case:

It remains impossible to understand how Abedin received security clearance to work at the State Department, which allows her access to top-secret documents.