Posts

Too Many Lies, Too Much of the Time

“He who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world’s believing him. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good dispositions.” — THOMAS JEFFERSON, letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 19, 1785

I am beginning to wonder if Americans have grown so accustomed to the lies told by the President, his administration, and others said to be highly regarded, that we are losing a sense of outrage?

Hillary & Brian WilliamsTo the degree that Brian Williams’ serial lies have evoked a national discussion, it’s good to know that most people think he has lost credibility to the point of not being a news anchor, but one still has to wonder what NBC will do at the end of the six month suspension it has imposed on him. I am cynical enough to think he may be offered a job at MSNBC.

It is far more significant that, regarding the leading candidate to be the Democratic Party’s choice to run for President in 2016, we know she engaged in similar lies of having been “under fire.”

It’s one thing to expect politicians to lie, but the nation’s future is at stake when we still do not know the truth of Hillary Clinton’s full role in the Benghazi attack that left a U.S. ambassador and three others dead. She was the Secretary of State at the time and we watched her stand at his side as the President attributed the attack to a video no one had ever seen. The fact that the attack occurred on the anniversary of 9/11 was conveniently ignored.

The refusal to identify the Islamic State (ISIS) as an enemy representative of the global jihad is not just politics. It is a lie on the order of the President’s assertion that “The Islamic State is not Islamic.” As we are repeatedly reminded, if you cannot or will not identify an enemy, you are leaving yourself and, in this case, the nation open to attack.

Indeed, many elements of the Obama administration have engaged in lying on a level that goes beyond “politics.” It is a deliberate attack on science itself when the EPA, NOAA and NASA actively engage in distorting data to say that the Earth is warming when it has been in a well-established cooling cycle for 19 years at this point.

How are we expected to maintain any confidence in an administration that lies about employment statistics and other critical data we need to know regarding the economy?

The lie about “income inequality” is the core rational for Communism. There is no such thing as equality when it comes to income because some people enjoy higher pay for higher skills, higher productivity, and higher responsibility. We don’t pay “sanitation engineers” the same as we pay real engineers. And you don’t create new jobs by raising the minimum wage when it will reduce existing and potential new jobs.

Most dramatically, it was a series of lies told by the President that led to the passage of ObamaCare. Its two thousand-plus pages were not read by the exclusively Democratic members of Congress who passed it and, today, we learn that it is a major contributor to the nation’s deficit which is the result of the government spending more than it takes in. For the past six years Obama’s policies have added trillions to our national debt, now $18 trillion and growing. It is going to be a burden on generations to come.

There is no evidence of the tax reforms that Congress knows are needed, nor reforms to the entitlement programs that are just years from becoming insolvent.

Whether it is domestic or foreign affairs, Americans have been at a loss to expect the national press to address the lies because they would have to abandon the protection they have afforded the President for the past six years. Only one news service, Fox News, is credited with providing the truth. Fortunately the Internet has provided access to many other outlets where the truth can be found. And, yes, many that maintain the lies.

It should come as no surprise that the Obama administration wants to regulate the Internet with a program that call “Net neutrality”, but there is nothing neutral about it. The freedom the Internet enjoys is the best example of the value Americans put on an uncensored source of information and communication. The Obama administration wants to control the Internet in the same way that despots around the world want to do.

There is always a far higher price to pay for believing lies than knowing the truth.

We expect our enemies to lie. We should not expect our government to do so in such a routine and obscene fashion.

© Alan Caruba, 2015

A Breakthrough in the Benghazi Investigation

Across America people have asked, petitioned, begged for answers to what really occurred the night our U.S. Compound in Benghazi was attacked a little over three years ago. With equal energy Obama and his crew have worked diligently to cover-up the facts of that horrendous evening.

A United States Ambassador was killed, three brave Department of State employees were, also. Two of the killed were Special Operators assigned to Diplomatic Protection and exchanged their lives so others could live. Investigations followed but were always stymied so no conclusion could be reached, even the convening of a Congressional Committee to look into all matters related to the Benghazi attack has been stalled.

One individual who has extensive first-hand knowledge has been hushed by the Obama Department of Justice led by Attorney General Holder. This individual is former four star general and CIA Director Petraeus. Obama knows that Petraeus retains damaging information that could virtually destroy any resemblance of credibility Obama and his group has remaining, and actually could go further to destroy all remaining functioning credibility of the White House and State Department which could further adversely affect international relations. General David Petreaus was CIA Director the night of September 11, 2012, when our U.S. Compound in Benghazi was attacked. Obama and associates have promised former Director Petraeus that aggressive legal actions would be initiated against him if he talks, and he would be facing federal prison. The pressure against General Petreaus is significant enough to create a problem for even the Congressional Committee wanting him to testify.

Yet I believe we are in a season by God’s Hand that is causing a whirlwind, a tornado if you will, to blow and cause remarkable separation leading to exposing all that man attempts to bury and remain hidden.

Today it was announced that Judicial Watch has prevailed with their federal court petition requiring documents and information pertaining to the Benghazi attack to be opened for public review. With full appreciation to Judicial Watch, we can now read how the Diplomatic Security Command Center, a department within the U.S. Department of State, was operating the night of the Benghazi attack, and very aware the attack on our compound was being carried out by highly trained and organized Islamic Militia. The Diplomatic Security Command Center was monitoring the attack in “real time” through video feed coming from a drone flying overhead of the compound. Furthermore, Judicial Watch has directed intense light on otherwise very dark areas pertaining to the attack, and a cursive review of the now disclosed documents reflect that a massive cover-up has, indeed, been taking place over the past nearly four years.

It appears officials at the highest levels of our government are quite aware of what occurred the evening of the attack, and equally, what response America took or didn’t take to save our Ambassador and brave personnel.

RELATED ARTICLE: Judicial Watch Obtains State Department DSCC Records on Terrorist Attack on Benghazi

Hillary: ‘Don’t Let Anybody Tell You’ that ‘Businesses Create Jobs’ [+video]

There is only one thing that creates a job – profit. If a business, sole proprietor or large corporation, does not make a profit they will not add to their payrolls. The only thing that creates a government job is taxes, paid by businesses and those who work for businesses.

It appears Hillary Clinton does not understand that. Restoring Liberty’s Joe Miller reports:

Appearing at a Boston rally for Democrat gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley on Friday, Hillary Clinton told the crowd gathered at the Park Plaza Hotel not to listen to anybody who says that “businesses create jobs.”

“Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs,” Clinton said.

Hillary has not had a private sector job since the days just after she left college. She may be confusing the work she has done for the government as a job but perhaps misunderstands who paid her salary? Perhaps she should have run her remarks by those businesses that contribute to her campaign? Perhaps this is just a new way of saying “You didn’t build that” refurbished for the 2016 presidential race?

Jeb Bush is coming to Sarasota, FL: Why?

To the Republican Party of Sarasota County,

I understand that former Florida Governor Jeb Bush will be speaking as your “special guest” at an Election Rally at Dolphin Aviation at 9:00 a.m. on November 3rd, 2014.

Question: Why are you having as a “special guest” the man who presented Hillary Clinton with the Liberty Medal?

Jeb Bush presented Hillary Clinton with the Liberty Medal on September 10, 2013 in Philadelphia on the eve of the the first anniversary of the attack on the Benghazi, Libya mission. Bush praised Clinton by stating:

Former Secretary Clinton has dedicated her life to serving and engaging people across the world in democracy. These efforts as a citizen, an activist, and a leader have earned Secretary Clinton this year’s Liberty Medal.

SOE_Dedication_pic_-_1

9/11 and Fallen Heroes Memorial, Patriots Park, Sarasota, FL. Photo Courtesy of Salt of the Earth.

This act of war got one of our U.S. Ambassadors (the first U.S. Ambassador killed on duty since 1979), his aide and two Navy SEALs killed. Sarasota County is home to Patriots Park where the first and only 9/11 and Fallen Heroes monument stands. Engraved in the black granite are the names of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith and Navy SEALs Tyrone S. Woods and Glen Doherty. This monument is within miles of where Bush will be speaking.

Hillary Clinton was responsible as Secretary of State to protect the lives of these men. She failed. She is complicit in tyranny not freedom and we in the veteran community want her prosecuted for treason against the United States. Why did Jeb Bush honor this “Jane Fonda” of the 21st century? Why did Jeb Bush break bread with this Democrat and honor her?

Jeb Bush must denounce Hillary Clinton and should not have honored her with a Liberty Medal.

I ask the TEA Party and veterans groups across Florida to be at this event to ask Jeb Bush this simple question: Why did you present a Liberty Medal to a devoted follower of Saul Alinsky?

Hillary Clinton neither embraces freedom nor liberty, she embraces tyranny and evil. Hillary Clinton is a Collectivist who works tirelessly against the unalienable rights embedded in our U.S. Constitution.

RELATED VIDEO: Jeb Bush with Hillary Clinton at the Liberty Medal presentation:

Hillary won’t run in 2016

Clinton inadvertently admits she may have violated law over Benghazi.

I’ve publicly stated I do not believe Hillary Clinton will be running for president in 2016. Her recent performance during the book rollout evidenced someone incapable of standing up to scrutiny. She certainly didn’t comport herself in a professional manner.

And so this recent Wall Street Journal article by Victoria Toensing builds that case even more, writing, “In her recent interview with ABC’s Diane Sawyer, Hillary Clinton said “I was not making security decisions” about Benghazi, claiming “it would be a mistake” for “a secretary of state” to “go through all 270 posts” and “decide what should be done.” And at a January 2013 Senate hearing, Mrs. Clinton said that security requests “did not come to me. I did not approve them. I did not deny them.”

Well, it seems the former Secretary of State may have just admitted she either didn’t follow, or intentionally broke the law — but then again, if you’re a liberal progressive socialist, laws are just recommendations.

As Toensing says, by statute, Clinton was required to make specific security decisions for defenseless consulates like Benghazi, and was not permitted to delegate them to anyone else. The Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999, or Secca, was passed in response to the near-simultaneous bombings of U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, on Aug. 7, 1998.”

The similarities of history are disturbingly coincidental.

In 1999, Bill Clinton was president. Patrick Kennedy, now the undersecretary of state for management, was then acting assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security. Susan Rice, now the national security adviser, was then assistant secretary of state for African affairs. As with the Benghazi terrorist attacks, an Accountability Review Board (ARB) was convened for each bombing.

Their reports in January 1999 called attention to “two interconnected issues: 1) the inadequacy of resources to provide security against terrorist attacks, and 2) the relative low priority accorded security concerns throughout the U.S. government.”

Just as U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens did in 2012, the U.S. ambassador to Kenya, Prudence Bushnell, had made repeated requests for security upgrades in 1997 and 1998. All were denied.

It’s not certain whether George Santayana said, “those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it”, but we know for certain Hillary said, “what difference at this point does it make?”

In 1998 to ensure accountability in the future, the review boards (ARB) recommended “[f]irst and foremost, the Secretary . . . should take a personal and active role in carrying out the responsibility of ensuring the security of U.S. diplomatic personnel abroad” and “should personally review the security situation of embassy chanceries and other official premises.” And for new embassy buildings abroad, “all U.S. government agencies, with rare exceptions, should be located in the same compound.”

So Congress quickly agreed and passed Secca, a law implementing these (and other) recommendations. It mandated that the secretary of state make a personal security waiver under two circumstances: when the facility could not house all the personnel in one place and when there was not a 100-foot setback. The law also required that the secretary “may not delegate” the waiver decision.

What difference does it make? Well, Benghazi didn’t house all U.S. personnel in one building. There was the consulate and an annex, one of the two situations requiring a security waiver by the secretary of state, which could not be delegated.

However, here is the doozy: the “home cooking of the books.” Recognizing that the Benghazi consulate (like the Nairobi and Dar es Salaam embassies) was a previously nongovernmental building, the 2012 Benghazi review board — co-chaired by Amb. Thomas Pickering (Ms. Rice’s supervisor in 1998) and Adm. Michael Mullen — reported that this “resulted in the Special Mission compound being excepted from office facility standards and accountability under” Secca.

I don’t smell a rat. I smell a Clinton — but then again they may be synonymous.

Mrs. Clinton either personally waived these security provisions required by law or she violated the law by delegating the waiver to someone else — take your pick, they both suck!

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.

Benghazi: An Iranian Act of State Sponsored Terrorism?

Sunday, Lisa Benson and I interviewed Kenneth R. Timmerman, author of Dark Forces: The Truth About What Happened in Benghazi. It is a gripping expose, replete with evidence of deception and cover up, about who perpetrated the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans Ambassador Chris Stevens, communications aide Sean Smith, ex-Navy Seals CIA-contractors, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty on 9/11/2012. Dark Forces conveys the thesis that the attacks in Benghazi were preventable. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton bears responsibility for ignoring those warnings, and preventing a military response. Ambassador Stevens and his security team had repeatedly warned Clinton of the precarious security situation in Tripoli and Benghazi requesting additional resources. Clinton for reasons of her own opposed any military response to the attacks. U.S. Special Forces operators on the ground 9/11/2012 could have saved the Americans who perished, but were told to “hold in place” during the opening moments of the attack.

Benghazi was the hub of the U.S. covert arms smuggling to Islamist groups in Libya and Syria.

  •   The Administration supplied weapons to fight Qaddafi in Libya and Assad in Syria knowing full well that many of the rebel leaders were al Qaeda operatives.
  •  The White House sent members of the National Security “Staff” (ex NSC) to Libya on operational missions to negotiate arms buybacks from Libyan rebel leaders in an apparent violation of the National Security Act of 1947.
  •  A Minimum of 2,500 Surface to air missiles (MANPADS) went “missing” in Libya. Many of them – upgraded with CIA Technology-have fallen into the hands of al Qaeda terrorists.

The Iranian regime coordinated the Benghazi attack.

  • The group that took credit for the Benghazi attack, Ansar al Sharia, was trained and equipped by the Quds Force, the overseas expeditionary arm of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps.
  • Both the CIA in Benghazi, the Delta Force and Special Operations troops in Tripoli were actively monitoring Iranian operations in Benghazi. They warned their chain of command – including Ambassador Stevens – that Iranians were preparing a terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi. However, they were deceived by a faked kidnapping of Quds Force operatives posing as humanitarian workers by paid Ansar al-Shariah operatives.

Timmerman called the Benghazi attack “an act of state terrorism” by Iran’s Quds Force on yesterday Salem Radio Network program. Listen to the Lisa Benson Radio Show interview with Timmerman, here.

This weekend, Timmerman authored a New York Post article drawn from his book to be published tomorrow. In it he revealed the shadowy figure who planned and paid for the Quds Force attack that killed the four Americans; its commander, Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Suleymani, The shadowy Iranian spy chief who helped plan Benghazi . Suleymani is the nexus of the Iranian global terrorism campaign aimed at destabilizing the Middle East.

Source:  New York Post composite graphic 6-22-14

In the New York Post article, Timmerman reveals the extensive planning, deception and use of the Ansar al-Shariah militia for the Quds Force attack on the night of 9/11/12.

Here are some excerpts:

Qassem Suleymani is the head of the Quds Force, an organization that acts as a combination CIA and Green Berets for Iran, and a man who has orchestrated a campaign of chaos against the United States around the world.

Today, the Obama Administration has allied itself with Suleymani to fight the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

In this case, Iran’s goal — a Shi’ite-friendly government in Iraq — coincides with America’s hope that the country doesn’t fall apart.

Timmerman cites a former Iranian intelligence source saying:

“Iran wants chaos. They want to generate anti-American anger, radicalize the rebels, and maintain a climate of war,” a former Iranian intelligence chief for Western Europe told me. “They are very serious about this. They want to damage the reputation of the United States as a freedom-loving country in the eyes of the Arabs.”

“In Libya, Iran wanted to block US influence, which they saw as a threat,” the intelligence chief said. “They saw the uprising against Khadafy — and the Arab Spring more generally — as an opportunity to accomplish this.”

Timmerman reveals Suleymani’s central role in the Iranian global terrorism campaign and the murders in Benghazi:

Suleymani has orchestrated attacks everywhere from Lebanon to Thailand. The US Department of Justice accuses him of trying to hire a Mexican drug cartel to blow up the Saudi Ambassador to the United States while he was in Washington, DC.

My sources, meanwhile, say Suleymani was involved in an even more direct attack on the US — the killing of Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Benghazi, Libya.

Suleiymani’s record of killing Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan:

“The team in operational command in Benghazi were Qassem Suleymani’s people,” the former Baghdad deputy chief of station, John Maguire, told me. “They were a mature, experienced, operational element from Iran. These guys are the first-string varsity squad.” And they were playing for keeps.

Maguire had matched wits with Suleymani, the Quds Force commander, for two years in Iraq and came away with a healthy respect for his capabilities. “He is talented, charismatic. His people are competent and well trained. They have all the operational traits we used to value. And they are committed to this fight for the long haul.”

[…]

The faked kidnapping in Benghazi was a typical Quds Force op. They used a local militia that on the surface detested Shias, just as they used the Taliban in Afghanistan and manipulated al Qaeda.

“They are very good at deception operations,” Maguire told me.

And our side didn’t have a clue. The CIA chief of base and his deputy fell for it hook, line and sinker.

The details of planning, recruitment of the Ansar al-Shariah militia and the leaders of the Benghazi, Quds Force officer Ibrahim Mohammed Joudaki and Hezbollah operative Khalil Harb are detailed in Timmerman’s New York Post article.  Timmerman concluded with this comment:

This is the deadly deception we face from Iran. Suleymani may work with us to battle ISIS, but don’t believe for one moment that he’s our friend.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

Music Video — “Four Dead in Benghazi”

I made this music video because I want low-info voters to get it; to understand that four Americans unnecessarily died at the hands of Al Qaeda terrorists who overtook our U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Please do not be offended by my use of the term “low-info”. I am merely referring to Americans like my brother. He works hard, coaches youth football and gets his news from the mainstream media. He does not listen to talk radio, watch Foxnews or surf the internet. Thus, he is a low-info voter.

The MSM has refused to seriously investigate the Benghazi terrorist attack. Why did Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Obama refuse to answer the cries for help of those trapped in our consulate. U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens was brutally humiliated, tortured and murdered.

Before being killed, Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty killed 60 of the consulate attackers. Diplomat Sean Smith was also killed during the attack.

The attack was before the 2012 presidential election. Obama was on the campaign trail pounding his chest like Tarzan proclaiming that Osama Bin Laden was dead, Al Qaeda was on the run and terrorism was no longer a threat.

With the anniversary of 9/11 coming up, Ambassador Stevens requested more security at our consulate. Strengthening security at our consulate would imply that terrorism was alive and well. So, the Obama Administration (Hillary Clinton) denied Stevens’ request.

In essence, Obama and Clinton decided that the lives of Americans at our consulate in Benghazi was acceptable collateral damage to protect Obama’s narrative. The Obama Administration’s decision was unprecedented because we never leave Americans behind.

Special thanks to the true patriots at Kurt Howland Enterprises for donating their time producing this video.

My fellow Americans please watch this brief music video, “Four Dead in Benghazi”.

‘RESET’ in Russian means ‘invade Ukraine’

The official ceremony in which US. State Secretary Hillary Clinton presented Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov with a pretty plastic “Reset” button that had a mistranslated Russian word “peregruzka” written in Roman characters, was the first act of the “new and improved” foreign policy of the Obama administration. It happened almost exactly five years ago, in March of 2009, during Hillary’s visit to Moscow. We covered this event twice:

How Do You Say ‘Hillary’s Gaffe’ in Russian?

Middle Finger to Obama On Russian TV Is Not What It Seems

A lot has happened since the “new and improved” foreign policy took effect, backed up by the Nobel Peace Prize, awarded to Obama in advance for his expected achievements. During these short five years, glorious improvements have been popping up, almost spontaneously, all over the map – North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Honduras, Venezuela, Egypt, Libya, Syria, and now Russia.

To really understand how it happened, let’s go to the roots and reconstruct the initial Moscow meeting between Hillary and Lavrov, using advanced techniques in reading lips and body language on the available footage.

HILLARY: America gives Russia this pretty button. It says “reset” in English and in Russian, I think.
LAVROV: Well, I do not think it means what you think it means. See? This here in Russian means “Invade Ukraine.”
HILLARY: Whatever. (Both smile for the cameras)

reset

Click on image for a larger view.

Hillary as President? Heaven Forbid

It is mind boggling that the mainstream media, and the American electorate elevate political people to divine levels of love and respect based solely on image and exposure, but not on substantive achievements. Meanwhile, though red flags fly high, Americans ignore them as though they don’t even exist.

Would someone please identify one major accomplishment in the political career of Hillary Clinton, other than sleeping with a president and winning an election, and then flying around the world shaking hands with dignitaries and having her pictures taken for future campaign marketing.

To the exclusion of many more accomplished democratic colleagues among governors and senators, this woman is already fete accompli, the runaway nominee for the democratic party in 2016, already coronated by the constant barrage of love-Hillary publicity.

But let’s take a step backwards and examine the candidate beyond the façade.

Where do we begin?

Before and after becoming First Lady, Hillary was the subject of a number of investigations by the Office of Independent Counsel, dubbed:  Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate and Hillary Rodham Cattle Futures controversy. (See links below for explanation)

Many question her motives for staying with a man who had a well-known history of philandering, not only while governor of Arkansas, but in the Oval Office as well. Bill Clinton repeatedly denied his White House trysts, until a semen stain nailed him as an outright liar. Despite all the private and public embarrassment, Hillary’s lifelong quest to be the first female president trumped honor and respect. After all, she’s got the number one Democratic campaigner on her side. That’s a political insurance policy.

How does that speak of integrity?

For the sake of brevity, let’s examine all her accomplishments while serving New York State as a U.S. Senator for eight years. I researched. Couldn’t find any. It’s clear to anyone paying attention that she was basically holding a political position as a platform to run for president in 2008. It’s all about cosmetics.

When Obama became president, Hillary Clinton became the Secretary of State for four years. How would an objective person measure her major accomplishments during her time on the international scene?

Pathetic.

America’s relationship with every foreign power is worse off than it was in 2008. Beyond Afghanistan, the world has evolved into global chaos. Even where chaos has yet to erupt, respect for the United States has diminished, virtually everywhere. Things are worse off today in North Korea, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Syria, Jordan, Pakistan, Eastern Europe, and most every other nation in the middle east including Israel who no longer trusts us. Then there is China who owns us, Russia who embarrasses us, Africa, Mexico, Canada, and the European Union, where leaders are denouncing American wiretapping and find themselves at the low end of the priority totem pole.

The anti-Muslim Brotherhood counter-uprisings in Egypt, which brought secular government back to that country, saw many derogatory placards and signs in the streets of Cairo and other places, denouncing Hillary Clinton as pro-Muslim Brotherhood, calling her a terrorist sympathizer and more. She was clearly on the side of Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood, as was Barack Obama.

While we’re at it, let’s not forget that Hillary Clinton’s Number One confidante and traveling companion during her senatorial and secretarial years, was Huma Abedin, raised and schooled strictly Islamic in Wahhabi Saudi Arabia, daughter of parents closely tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, sister of a man tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, and who held a high-ranking position at Georgetown University in the Muslim Students Association, (MSA) a stepchild of the Muslim Brotherhood. This woman had open access to all of our most important national security secrets. How’s that for potential breaches of national security?

Americans want this woman to be our president?

The coup de gras, so to speak, is the despicable behavior of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton before, during and following the Benghazi fiasco. Yes, despicable. That is not a strong enough term. This so-called leader did not have the conscience, yet the good judgment to provide much needed increases in security to one of the major hot-spots in the diplomatic world, despite all the pleas from consulate staffers, including Ambassador Stevens himself. If she says she was unaware, that makes her a very poor leader and incompetent at best. If she was aware, it not only makes her incompetent, it could even be described as negligent manslaughter.

When the attack was under way and shortly thereafter, despite the fact that information was coming in immediately, that this was no demonstration about a video, it was a terror attack by an al Qaeda affiliate. Yet, nothing was done. Everyone, including Hillary, sat on their hands. No one even sent investigators to the scene for two weeks thereafter.

When the smoldering rose smoke to the heavens and bodies were being bagged, Hillary ducked any and all questions, as did her boss. (How does one define “Obstruction of Justice?) Three days later, she blamed the attack on a spontaneous demonstration against an anti-Muslim video, which she, Obama, and everyone else knew was false. Nevertheless, Hillary flew the coop – literally – and transferred her responsibilities to UN Ambassador Susan Rice to answer public questions and parrot the lies on five news shows as instructed.

For the next four months, rather than take a leadership role in the investigation, Hillary ducked all inquiries and went glob trotting for four months, avoiding congressional inquiries, (obstructing justice) shaking hands and accomplishing nothing, all in the interest of making herself unavailable until the heat died down. And when she finally had to appear before congress, she pulled off a typical Hillary and went on the offense with her despicable statement, “What difference does it make.”

Head shaking yet?

I ask democrats:  Is this really who you want to see as an American president? Don’t you have anyone in the government, or in the states, who is unquestionably honorable, who will not risk national security, who will respond to important inquires, who will put America first over politics, who will take a substantive leadership role as opposed to daily tasks of photo ops and hand shakes?

If she is the best you can come up with, I would hate to see the worst.

Ladies and gentlemen of all parties, let’s do the right thing.  We’ve already had a president whose loyalty, honor and integrity, and virtual identity, has been in serious question by millions. We don’t need to go through that again.

Or it is all about winning, and nothing else?

RELATED COLUMNS AND SOURCES:

SHOCK! Hillary Clinton argues – What difference, at this point, does it make about how it happened? – YouTube

Hillary Clinton’s record

Hillary Clinton Faces Criminal Charges In Egypt

Whitewater controversy – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

White House travel office controversy – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

White House FBI files controversy – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hillary Rodham cattle futures controversy – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Common Core: George Soros and Hillary Clinton want your kids

“Conceived as the Democratic answer to the Heritage Foundation,” the George Soros-founded and funded Center for American Progress (CAP) was considered Hillary Clinton’s think-tank at its inception in 2003.  President and CEO John Podesta, once Bill Clinton’s chief of staff, was seen as its nominal head.

CAP was viewed as “a kind of Clinton White-House-in-exile – or a White House staff in readiness for President Hillary Clinton,” according to Nation reporter Bob Dreyfuss in his illuminating 2004 article entitled, “An Idea Factory for the Democrats.” Many of those mentioned have since populated the Obama administration, while CAP has become the president’s favorite think-tank.

Dreyfuss, who quotes Hillary Clinton, writes, “We’ve had the challenge of filling a void on our side of the ledger for a long time, while the other side created an infrastructure that has come to dominate political discourse. The center [CAP] is a welcome effort to fill that void.”

Podesta who has fulfilled the need for a “progressive counterpart” to the conservative Heritage Foundation is now back at the White House as presidential advisor.  Neera Tanden the former aide to Senator Clinton is now CAP’s president. Before Podesta’s recent departure, the policy initiative known as Common Core became a major public education project for CAP.

Explaining the Plummet in Test Scores under Common Core

But students’ test scores are plummeting under Common Core, especially in New York State. What is the solution proposed by the Center for American Progress?  A longer school day, of course. Never considering that the standards themselves might be flawed, they make the unsubstantiated assertion that drops in test scores show that the standards are more “rigorous” and therefore require more time.  That’s their argument in their recently released report called “Redesigning and Expanding School Time to Support Common Core Implementation.”

One thing is for sure: the standards have never been tested, and even proponents like Dr. Dana Rickman, director of policy and research at the Georgia Partnership for Excellence in Education, have admitted that “It isbelieved they will lead to improvement.”

Are we to trust the beliefs of those promoting Common Core, like the authors of the report?  One of them, Tiffany D. Miller, associate director for school improvement, has among other things been a fundraiser for the Democratic Party.

Two of the report’s authors come from the National Center on Time & Learning (NCTL): David A. Farbman, a senior researcher, and David J. Goldberg, vice president for national policy and partnerships.  NCTL itself, however, is an outgrowth of the Center for American Progress.  It was “launched in October 2007 at an event at the Center for American Progress in Washington, D.C. featuring Senator Ted Kennedy,” and grew out of the work of a Boston-based nonprofit, Massachusetts 2020, which led the first statewide expanded learning time grant program in the country, according to Wikipedia.  NCTL was formed to expand that work to more states and to develop policies at the federal level.

The report serves this effort: to expand the role of public schools, fulfilling Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s vision of “community schools” on a national scale.  These would pretty much replace home life by offering such things as homework help, three square meals, and health clinics.

The “report” masquerades as a legitimate report.  But when one looks at the sources and methods used, it is clear that there is no real review of evidence.

Questionable Sources and Grandiose Claims

The first paragraph signals more hype than evidence with the grand claim, “Implementation of the standards, as currently planned in 45 states and the District of Columbia . . . means that the vast majority of students will soon be held to the highest set of English language arts and math literacy expectations in U.S. history.”  This grandiose statement comes from the Fordham Foundation, itself a promoter of Common Core and recipient of funds from the biggest Common Core funder, the Gates Foundation.

The report is full of such sweeping, unsupported assertions and such frequently bandied terms like “deep” and “deeper,” as well as “critical thinking.”  In Common Core promotional material such terms have become commonly accepted truisms; they are repeated by proponents as if they were proven measurements. (These are unstated references to Bloom’s taxonomy.)

The generalities abound: “Replacing lectures with interactive learning between teachers and students, especially learning to a richer and higher level, will require more classroom time, as teachers will have to personalize their attention to individual and small groups of students.”

The report’s authors quote a Chicago teacher who has been told that she needs to be a “facilitator” instead of a teacher in order to properly teach the Common Core standards.  The source for the quotation is Catalyst Chicago, published by the Community Renewal Society, another progressive advocacy organization.

The report’s authors continue to bandy about terms that imply intellectual sophistication: “High-quality expanded-time schools are already using the opportunities inherent in longer classes to build in individualized instruction, critical thinking, and problem solving. . . .”

The authors refer to a report by the “policy group Achieve”: “Teachers will likely need more instructional time in order to teach more rigorous, higher-level content in more depth and to integrate literacy skills into their lessons.”  Achieve is the well-connected non-profit that was the architect for Common Core.

For math, the authors write, “Common Core will bring a shift in focus from briefly and superficially covering many topics to studying fewer topics in much greater depth.”  The authorities they cite are Common Core proponents: Educational Testing Service and EngageNY, of the New York State Department of Education, which has adopted Common Core.

For math, the authors claim that fractions will be introduced at earlier ages, but that as time goes on students will draw upon their accumulated knowledge to solve increasingly complex problems—hardly a new practice in education.  What they don’t mention is that algebra is being moved to ninth grade from eighth grade, and that the standards impose tasks on young children far above their maturity levels.

Masking the Real Aims

Part of the overall (but often unstated) goal of Common Core is closing the “achievement gap.”  Proponents like to hide the fact that slower learners will have endless opportunities to learn the material under the cover of “deeper learning.”  Consider these two sentences in the report:

“Allowing students to both try and fail and requiring them to find more than one route to success will mean providing them with more time to explore and learn on their own than is the norm in today’s classrooms. Students will then be asked to explain their reasoning, a process that consumes time but fosters still deeper learning.”

Such demands to demonstrate deeper learning have led to bizarre math.  Much of the parental opposition to Common Core has been instigated by the math homework. To truly understand how convoluted the new math is one needs to see the examples.  One sign at an anti-Common Core rally at the Georgia state capitol, on February 4th, did this and exclaimed, significantly, “Parents Can’t Help.”  Indeed, parents are being cut out in more ways than one.

The sign set side-by-side a long multiplication problem under traditional math and then under the new Common Core math.  One glance will show how math is being unnecessarily complicated in the demand to have students “explain their reasoning,” while allowing credit for those students who get the wrong answer but provide pleasing explanations.  (In English Language Arts, more time is to be spent on “deep reading” and “deep discussion.”)  This is one way to close the “achievement gap.”


Cherokee Tea Party Patriots-Woodstock, GA’s Photos

Indeed, the CAP report states that the aim of a longer school day is to close the achievement gap: underprivileged students need time to catch up.  However, the authors also claim that a longer school day is needed to teach the more rigorous standards.  They want it both ways.

“Collaboration”: More Money for Failed Progressive Teaching Methods

Another reason for the longer school day is for time to “collaborate”—hardly a new idea in education,” as references to such practices as “cooperative reading” in the 1990s indicate. “Intra-student communication and collaboration” will presumably prepare students for what they will encounter in higher education and the work force.  But this requires more time, even as the students seem to be left to themselves: “Having regular opportunities for student collaboration necessitates many group projects and the continuous integration of a technique known as ‘turn and talk,’ where students discuss the topic at hand with each other and seek to gain insights from their peers.”

Teachers are supposed to be “facilitators” to their students, and spend their time analyzing student data and determining which teacher fits best with which “cohort” of students.  Extra time is needed for teacher collaboration and “professional development,” presumably to improve teaching.  But as is the common wisdom among teachers, such “collaboration” is a means to control teachers, to make sure they don’t go off script and improvise.

Of course, the longer school day means spending more tax-payer money for keeping schools open and more pay for teachers. According to the report, the Department of Education is already spending money on longer school days through School Improvement Grants.  Flexibility waivers allow funding to be set aside for tutoring under the Supplemental Educational Services program for “whole-school expanded learning time.”  The 21st Century Community Learning Centers waiver also allows in-school expanded learning time.  No doubt, there are cases where students require extra time and extra help.  But it seems that the longer school day will mean for most students time to sit in groups endlessly discussing preselected topics with their peers, devising byzantine ways to explain through drawings and stories their thinking on otherwise straightforward math problems—all while gaining little actual knowledge.

Collaboration, facilitation, critical thinking, etc., are the hallmarks of progressive, student-centered teaching methods that have long been demonstrated to be counterproductive.  As Jeanne S. Chall stated in her 2000 seminal survey, The Academic Achievement Challenge, “The major conclusion of my study in this book is that a traditional, teacher-centered approach to education generally results in higher academic achievement than a progressive, student-centered approach.”  She found this to be particularly true for students who came from low-income and middle-income families, and had less school preparation.  Unlike the authors of the CAP report and the reports which appear in their bibliography, Chall was a scholar, a Harvard University education professor and was recognized in the New York Times as “having written the definitive analysis of reading research.”

The traditional teaching methods that Chall describes are also much more efficient.  But then again, efficiency and real education are not what the Center for American Progress is about.

The Relentless Hillary Clinton

Who said:

“We’re going to take things from you on behalf of the common good”

“It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few…and to replace it with shared responsibility, for shared prosperity”

“(We) …can just let business as usual go on and that means something has to be taken away from some people.”

“We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own…in order to create this common ground.”

“I think it’s time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in the entire economy that they are being watched.”

“I certainly think the free market has failed.”

Was it Joseph Stalin? Lenin? Hugo Chavez? Kim Jong II? All reveal a communist philosophy.

It was Hillary Clinton. Over the years, Hillary has made it clear that the redistribution of wealth—communism—is central to her beliefs and that her regard for capitalism and the free market economy of America is nil.

The election of Hillary Clinton would be an extension of the two terms of Barack Obama and, if possible, worse.

There are moments when a politician’s opportunity to win elections passes—often unnoticed at the time. I think that time was 2008 when Hillary lost the Democratic nomination to an unknown Senator from Illinois who offered “hope and change.”

Eight years later, having served as his Secretary of State, she will share his growing disapproval as Obamacare unfolds as the perfect namesake of the worst President the U.S. has ever known. And then, of course, there is their shared Benghazi scandal.

For these reasons, I believe Hillary will decide her time has passed and elect to avoid the ordeal of a presidential campaign even if the Democrats gave her the opportunity.

Her long career in the public eye has been filled with scandals and failures, not the least of which was her early advocacy of “HillaryCare.” When her husband was President, she was put in charge of developing a plan to take over the healthcare sector despite the fact that she was not an elected official, but merely his wife. It was overwhelmingly rejected.

The most astonishing thing about the 2016 elections is that the Party still regards her as the sole candidate to run for the presidency even as 2014 Democrats seeking reelection are fleeing the disastrous failure of Obamacare and the huge debt that Obama imposed on the nation. In addition, elements of the Party’s base, Millennials—younger voters—and Hispanics are among those deserting it while some are beginning to call for Obama’s resignation.

There is something so disconnected from the facts, from reality, about the Democratic Party that it suggests that those who remain within its numbers are deranged.

Some political pundits will be inclined to dismiss Hillary as too old to run, that her agenda would not stand up to examination, that she would be in effect Obama’s third term, or that her record as Secretary of State is littered with lies and failures.

Democrats do not vote based on such things. They vote out of a nostalgic attachment to its past, to its message of fairness and equality, out of concern for its false “war on women”, “income inequality”, and the accusations leveled against the Republican Party and the Tea Party movement. Democrats will be driven by the belief that it is time for a woman to be President, no matter how awful her qualifications or political beliefs.

This is also a belief of the nation’s leftist media and the momentum of news coverage about Hillary will be orchestrated by her. In the meantime, she will earn tidy sums giving speeches and receiving every leftist award that’s out there. No doubt there is a book in the works as well.

Hillary has left a long record of scandals in the course of her “public service.” The most recent was the lies about the killing of an American ambassador and three security personnel in Benghazi on the 2012 anniversary of 9/11. Most famously, under questioning she said, “What difference does it make?” Nowhere during the course of her service as Secretary of State is there a single major international treaty or significant accomplishment. Indeed, her tenure is marked by the severe loss of respect for America and its influence over foreign affairs.

The Clintons have always been about the acquisition of money to fund their lifestyle. In 1979 Hillary earned $100,000 profit on a $1,000 investment in cattle futures within the course of just nine months. She was guided to the windfall by a highly placed Tyson Foods connection. An investigation into her role as an attorney with the Rose law firm was stymied until its billing records magically appeared in her White House office, years after they had been subpoenaed.

Like Obama, Hillary never recalls anything involved with her past. She knew nothing. She was the victim of others around her. It’s all a right-wing conspiracy.

The real conspiracy has been the takeover of the Democrat Party by the far Left and its elected office holders who appear to have no regard for the decline of the nation thanks to their relentless spending and borrowing.

Hillary Clinton has been among the most relentless of all Democrats, concerned only with her determination to become the next President and for the acquisition of wealth that puts her and Bill firmly in the one percent of the extremely wealthy that Democrats and liberals defame.

A significant defeat of Democrats in 2014’s midterm elections will influence her decision. A lot can happen between now and 2016. Even the mainstream media’s fixation on getting her elected may decline. Stay tuned.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Who are the real war criminals? Time for House Select Committee to exercise subpoena powers over Benghizi

The Left likes to castigate me as a “war criminal” in an Alinsky-like attempt to attack and destroy my character. I find it quite absurd and desperate.

Consider this, I am an Honorably Discharged retired Army Lieutenant Colonel who took an action to protect my Soldiers — fellow Americans — in a combat zone. It was an action I fully reported, took responsibility for, and accepted the ramifications for conducting — there no lies, no blame.

Contrast that with someone who, after learning of Americans under attack by Islamic terrorists, went to bed, caught a flight the next day to Las Vegas, lied about the genesis of the attack, never took any responsibility for the lack of response and inaction, and referred to the whole episode as a “phony scandal.”

Or the irony of someone else who refused the requests for support from an American Ambassador, enjoined in a lie about the nature of the attack, and in an emotional rant declared, “what difference does it make?” Or finally, the person America must now entrust as its National Security Advisor, who promulgated the lie about the attack on the Americans in Benghazi and dismissed it as a “false controversy.”

Based on recently released Senate Intelligence Committee Benghazi report, and as discussed by Fox News:

A comprehensive report by the Senate Intelligence Committee definitively declared that individuals tied to Al Qaeda groups were involved in the Benghazi attack, challenging recent claims that the terror network was not a factor.

The report was released Monday, nearly one year after then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, under congressional questioning over the nature of the attack, shouted at lawmakers: “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

The administration initially claimed the attack sprung out of a protest, but has since given a more complicated assessment.” While the report does not implicate Al Qaeda “core” — the leadership believed to be in the Pakistan region — it does blame some of the most influential Al Qaeda branches, including Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). Individuals affiliated with terrorist groups, including AQIM, Ansar al-Sharia, AQAP, and the Mohammad Jamal Network, participated in the September 11, 2012, attacks.

Of course detractors will still say the impetus behind the attack was an “anti-islam” video trailer — hardly the case since this crude video had been published on the internet for some time. The report firmly stated that there was no protest in Benghazi.

Perhaps most damning for Obama, Clinton, Rice, and their support minions in this charade is that the committee determined:

The attack was “preventable” and the administration failed to respond to “ample” warnings that security was deteriorating before Sept. 11, 2012. The report faulted the State and Defense departments. It also cited the failure of the Obama administration to “bring the attackers to justice.”Specifically, the report said the intelligence community provided “ample strategic warning” that security in eastern Libya was deteriorating and U.S. personnel “were at risk.” The report said multiple “tripwires” were crossed signaling security problems, and the State Department should have increased its security posture in response.

So to all the liberal progressives — especially the media — if this was a Republican administration would you be so dismissive? Who are the real criminals — a decorated combat veteran who took an action to protect American lives or three individuals who took no action and allowed Americans to die, and then lie about it?

It is indeed time for the House Select Committee with subpoena powers to exercise them. Speaker Boehner and Leader Cantor, there is no excuse. If those on Capitol Hill will not get laser focused, the American people will. In the end, the real criminals will reap what they have sown.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.

Benghazi: A combination of “24”, “The Expendables” and “Sex in the City”

The media frenzy has now reached a fever pitch sparked by initial reports on Benghazi from bloggers (a.k.a. the alternate media). As more and more details become known there is the air of a Hollywood script combining the hits “24”, “The Expendables” and “Sex in the City”. Elements of each could be made into a new feature movie titled “The 24 Hours of Expendable Sex in the City of Tampa”. Truth is in fact stranger, and more sell-able, than fiction.

One story that has not gotten media attention is the ever growing number of changes made to senior military leaders since September 11, 2012.

One reporter who has taken this on is Ben Swann, prime-time anchor at WXIX Fox 19 in Cincinnati and writer, host and producer of Reality Check. Ben posted an investigative report video titled “Petraeus, Allen, Gaouette, Ham: The Benghazi Story The Media Isn’t Telling You” on his Facebook page. Swann reports on how three general officers and one admiral have been either fired or are under investigation since the Benghazi incident (sort of like the Oxbow Incident?).

Watch Ben Swann’s investigative report:

The Benghazi incident has all the elements of “24” in that the national command authority knew there were security issues in Libya well before the attack on 9/11/2012 yet its actions or inaction led to the deaths of four Americans including Ambassador Stevens who were “The Expendables”. Finally, we learn about “Sex in the City” of Tampa, Florida involving two women and two general officers.

Does it get any better than this?

Photos provided by Frances and Peter Rice taken of the Tampa home of Jill Kelly surrounded by the media:

Jill Kelly home with 4 TV sattelite trucks

Jill Kelley home alley with press

RELATED COLUMNS:

The Wall Street Journal- Hillary and Libya: The policy failure goes beyond the murder of her deputies in Benghazi

Bam’s Benghazi blues – David Petraeus’ Benghazi story—Peter Brookes – NYPOST.com

Petraeus leaves questions

David Petraeus testifies on Benghazi—Editorial – NYPOST.com

Give us truth on Benghazi – The Arizona Republic