Lt Gen. Thomas McInerney: ‘There Is Only One Person Who Can Say, Stand Down – And That’s The President’
May, 8, 2013 — nicedeb
“There is only one person who can say, stand down,” Gen. McInerney began in answer to Lou Dobbs question about the team of forces who were prepared to fly out of Tripoli. “And that is the President of the United States.”
“For us to deny forces to go to the aid or our people – we never leave people behind, Lou”, he continued. “And that’s where the dereliction of duty comes in and it permeates the whole command and control system. To say we couldn’t get the airplanes down there, we couldn’t get approval for air space….that doesn’t matter, Lou…you take action and you move out. I’m actually ashamed of the way our military responded – not the men and women, but our senior leaders – and it’s disgraceful, McInerney concluded.
5/12/2013 @ 3:54PMReplyDelete
Moral Consistency From Here To Benghazi
When our political leaders tell us lies, we can forgive them when they do so for clear national security reasons. That is, when they lie to protect us, not merely to protect themselves.
We can also forgive error when it is not due to negligence or incompetence. Uncertainty dogs our decisions at the best of times, but during an emergency requiring immediate action the uncertainty can bite hard.
The official immediate response (or lack of response) to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi might have been explained away retrospectively as an attempt to minimize losses. It might be argued that fewer Americans would have died in the attacks had everyone obeyed orders to stand down. A decision based on this belief would be forgivable, unless those in charge should have made a better assessment of the full context and had a better knowledge of the capabilities of available assets.
It seemed obvious at the time that not only had the rescue been botched by decision-makers at the highest level, but also the situation arose because an American ambassador was inadequately protected on hostile territory. Eight months later, with new information finally coming out, it appears that the obvious was true.
It had also been obvious that the Obama administration, which was two months away from an uncertain reelection, wanted the whole issue to go away. Clearly the events did not fit with the campaign narrative, and release of the full facts would have jeopardized the president’s reelection.
By the time our ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, appeared on several Sunday television programs to assert that the Benghazi consulate attack was a spontaneous reaction to a video offensive to Muslims, the absurdity of this claim should have been obvious to her and to everyone else. Now, eight months later, few question that the narrative was false.
Assessment of the response to the security failure remains important but is necessarily overshadowed by the question of who tried to cover it up. The two are inseparable.
Some might also be surprised by the smoothness with which the Obama administration shifted into cover-up mode. But there was no shift necessary. Given the administration’s transformative social and economic agenda, the resulting state of constant policy failure makes necessary a constant state of cover-up.
Four years after the official end of the last recession, economic growth remains below our long-term average and joblessness remains high. As cover, the fact that we are no longer at the bottom is hailed as a policy achievement. The so-called stimulus programs and assistance packages, far from helping, have delayed recovery, weakened civil society, and hindered economic progress. The Obama administration’s complicity in the stagnation must be denied, not for our benefit, but for theirs.
It is no accident that the response of the Obama administration (and many predecessors) to any perceived problem, especially healthcare costs and financial market reforms, resulted in bigger and more intrusive government. In the course of enhancing their own power, they create the very problems from which they pretend to protect us.
As Friedrich Hayek warned 70 years ago, the propaganda necessary to support the transfer of power from civil society to central government “is destructive of all morals” because it undermines one of their foundations: “the sense of and respect for truth.”
Members of Congress have been trying for several months to get the facts on the Benghazi fiasco. In a classic evasion of responsibility and reality, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked, “What difference does it make?” Alas, the truth is not her friend.
Allen West is my hero.ReplyDelete
Allen West on Israel:
Thanks for putting up a speaker LTG McInerny.
WASHINGTON, May 12 (Reuters) - A top Republican on Sunday said he expected more witnesses to step forward with information about last year's deadly attack on a U.S. mission in Benghazi and how President Barack Obama's administration responded to the unfolding events.
"I do think we're going to see more whistle blowers. I certainly know my committee has been contacted," Representative Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said in an interview on "Fox News Sunday".
Last week, Republican charges that White House covered up details of the Sept. 11, 2012 attack gathered more steam after former U.S. diplomat Greg Hicks told lawmakers he believed more could have been done to stop the assault by suspected Islamist militants.
Hicks, the second in command at the U.S. Embassy in Libya at the time, expressed his frustration in an emotionally charged congressional hearing that a U.S. military jet and special forces were not sent to help in Benghazi.
A report by ABC News provided additional momentum to the highly partisan flap over whether the administration tried to avoid casting the attack as terrorism at a time when the presidential election was less than two months away.
ABC released 12 versions of the administration's "talking points" on Benghazi that appeared to show how various agencies - particularly the State Department and the CIA - shaped what became the Obama administration's initial playbook for explaining how four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed in the attack.
The report showed the final talking points went through a series of revisions that scrubbed references to previous terror warnings, including one regarding the potential threat from al Qaeda in Benghazi and eastern Libya.
What ever happened to the poor bastard they threw in jail for making the video that they all claimed was the responsible agent for the attack?ReplyDelete
Still in the slammer is Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, but a Free Nakoula Nakoula Movement is arising.Delete
May 10, 2013
I’ll bet you three Dunkin Donuts you haven’t seen this. Read carefully:ReplyDelete
you owe me some donuts.Delete
Heh, Barky's foreign student card.Delete
And I thought I'd seen everything.
The LTG is not so disgusted by the government as to refuse his monthly stipend.ReplyDelete
No, he's a has been General, talking out his ass. Not half the soldier General MacArthur was, McI not knowing when old soldiers should just fade away.
Maybe LTG McI should become a politician, run for office, become President.
Or, maybe, he should just go get a job.
The folks in Benghazi were not left behind.
They were evacuated on 12SEP12, the morning after the attack.
No one was left behind.
He outranked your ass. IF you actually ever served.Delete
At last check you "claimed" to be getting a monthly welfare check as well.Delete
"The folks in Benghazi were not left behind.Delete
They were evacuated on 12 SEP 12, the morning after the attack.
No one was left behind."
You moron, WIO:
Don't you know that our Special Forces and Marines don't really give a shit whether we bring them back dead or alive, as long as we bring them back?
That was General Rodent.Delete
>The folks in Benghazi were not left behind.Delete
They were evacuated on 12SEP12, the morning after the attack.<
Damn, that's real dumb.
Some were even brought home in caskets, not left behind at all.
This statement is the kind of non sense we've all come to expect from General Archie 'rat' Bunker, Military Expert,
Not dumb at all, boobie..No one know how many caskets would have been inbound at Dover, if the Marine chopper went down, inbound to Benghazi.Delete
Reality gets in the way of your ooorah fantasies...
That General is commanded by civilians.
Always will be.
If on active duty, he should be relieved.
That "Standing Down" deal I brought up some threads ago when I posted it after hearing it on the radio.ReplyDelete
...but then I had second thoughts when I thought about Dakota Meyers getting four orders to stand down.
Seems likely that POTUS was never involved in that.
Also seems CERTAIN that BHO is ultimately responsible for Benghazi,
but is it literally true to say that
“There is only one person who can say, stand down,?”
A decision at that level would logically be made by the Commander in Cheif, but in this case could have been a nod of the head, or a wink of the eye by BHO to Hillary and Panetta, when he said do what you gotta do prior to bidding them nitie nite.Delete
...following days and years of discussions on how to write out Islamic Terrorism from the facts on the ground.
Anybody Know What The Symbol on Rep Steve King's Lapel Pin Is?ReplyDelete
Carney Keeps on DiggingReplyDelete
8:24 PM, MAY 10, 2013 • BY STEPHEN F. HAYES
Jay Carney aggressively defended the Obama administration’s handling of the Benghazi attacks and the revision of CIA talking points Friday in an uncharacteristically hostile White House press briefing. But in his attempts to protect himself and his administration colleagues, Carney offered a series of highly misleading answers that seem likely to do additional damage to his cause and White House credibility.
In response to a question about why he and others at the White House repeatedly pointed to a YouTube video as the cause of the attacks in Benghazi, Carney claimed that he was working from the same talking points as U.N. ambassador Susan Rice. But the video was not mentioned in any of the dozen drafts of talking points.
Carney also claimed that Rice devoted some of her time on five Sunday shows September 16 talking “about the possibility that al Qaeda might be involved or other al Qaeda affiliates might be involved or non-al Qaeda Libyan extremists.” But as BuzzFeed notes, that’s not really true. “Outside of a brief mention on CBS’s Face the Nation, Rice mostly did not discuss the involvement of al Qaeda or al Qaeda affiliates.”
Carney claimed that there was no hard evidence before Susan Rice’s television appearances on September 16 that terrorists linked to al Qaeda were involved in the attacks. That’s simply not true. Beth Jones, acting assistant secretary for Near Eastern affairs at the State Department, sent an email on September 12 reporting “the group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists.” Within 48 hours, the U.S. government had multiple streams of intelligence indicating that Ansar al Sharia was involved. The CIA station chief in Libya cabled back to Washington late on September 12 and reported that eyewitnesses said militants with ties to al Qaeda were involved in the attack. And the NSA had intercepted communications between two al Qaeda-linked jihadists in which one reported to the other that he’d participated in the attack. Before the end of the week, the U.S. government had gotten further confirmation of the involvement of militants with ties to al Qaeda directly from Libyan government officials.
Carney claimed that Ansar al Sharia “withdrew” claims of responsibility for the attacks in Benghazi. But their actual statement was “neither a full denial nor a full claim of responsibility,” according to Long War Journal’s Bill Roggio. The statement said only that “Ansar al Sharia brigade didn’t participate in this popular uprising as a separate entity” and later “the Brigade didn’t participate as a sole entity.”
In response to a question about the scrubbing of the CIA talking points for references to al Qaeda and Ansar al Sharia, Carney reiterated his claim that the White House only made “one change” to CIA talking points. That may be literally true, but it’s highly misleading. According to internal Obama administration documents and emails, other senior Obama officials suggested deep and substantive revisions to the talking points. When a reporter asked whether the White House had a role “not just in making but directing the changes,” Carney dodged.
But the most basic question went unasked: Why would the CIA rewrite talking points it had already finalized?
"Ansar al Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists."Delete
Yeah, well it coulda been some guys out for a good time after watching a video...
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT REALLY MAKE, AT THIS POINT? (Insert fist slamming emoticon here)
...and shame on you for your Islamophobic ways.
How dare they make such inquiries of the first women president!Delete
"Carney claimed that he was working from the same talking points as U.N. ambassador Susan Rice. But the video was not mentioned in any of the dozen drafts of talking points."ReplyDelete
"It's hard" to keep all the lies organized in the poor guy's head.
He's not Superman.
We all know who that is, and that's why he deserves a third term.
He's got a United Nations to run after this gig.Delete
What will his title be?
Chancellor of the Big Blue Ball?
Master and Commander of all Living and Dead?
What is "Occupation"Sun May 12, 04:51:00 PM EDT
Obama is imploding on his own ass...
Now that's entertainment.
>IRS Probe Expands To Groups Opposed To Gov't, Teaching Constitution...
Scrutiny Was Deeper Than Thought...
UPDATE: IRS also targeted tax-exempt status of Jewish groups...
House committee demands all communications by Wednesday...latest Drudge headlines<
Ruf's All American Kenyan Hero Commie Community Organizing Sunni slum bucket is opposed to teaching The Constitution!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's what a youth devoted to snorting coke will do to you.Delete
Rufus seems oddly missing today.ReplyDelete
Like he sneaked out the back, or something.
May have gone down to Dolye's to drown sorrows.Delete
Oh, you didn't say Soros. My bad
Damned cold doubled back on me. Have a ball; try not to tear the house down. On second thought, go ahead, I don't care.ReplyDelete
Get well soon.Delete
He's all for Defense Cuts.
If he gets pneumonia, we've got no-one to blame but him.
Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. is saying Obama offered up the IRS stuff to distract attention from Benghazi.ReplyDelete
This seems like admitting to bank fraud in order to distract attention from murder.
>“There’s no doubt this was not a coincidence that they dumped this story today, a Friday dump day,” Bachmann told WND. “This is when they put their negative stories out.”
But she said the looming storm cloud called Benghazi is the “soft underbelly” of the Obama administration and likely will keep Hillary Clinton from fulfilling her dream of occupying the Oval Office.
That would make it logical to release an IRS story that, while embarrassing, also could be cubby holed as another “conservative” dispute with the White House.<
Why Obama released embarrassing IRS bombshell
Michele Bachmann explains White House's willingness to take heat
SNAP: Seattle man 'goes nuts,' destroys several homes with bulldozer...ReplyDelete
A nobel effort, but nothing compared to the guy with the home built, up-armored Dozer.
If he'd headed up OIF instead of Gen Tommy, we woulda rolled over the ME years ago.
"My question is, why didn't other homeowners own bulldozers, too? Every homeowner should own a bulldozer, so they can stop lunatics with bulldozers."Delete
"Well, technically it's a skidder. The reason other homeowners didn't use their skidders or bulldozers to stop him is that those homeowners made the mistake of registering them.Delete
The government has been systematically seizing people's registered skidders and bulldozers since 2009."
""Too bad he didn't have a gopro next to his beer holder on the machineDelete
Bastards took my dozer and two skidders away after I attended the Tea Party event in the park, and held up a sign of Obama sucking on a smoke in pirate dress with the slogan Pirate of the Potomac. (ht:rat)Delete
Tough week for the administration.ReplyDelete
That calls for an Obama Family Vacation!
Grab the kids so we can get some good quality photo Ops...er...I mean good quality family time.
Las Vegas would be most fitting, before the real heat hits.Delete
If only what goes to Vegas would stay in Vegas.Delete
They always go to the Crown Estate, in Aspen, CO.Delete
I'd settle for a vacation in a double-wide estate at Flamingo Terrace, (that's a trailer park) :)Delete
Haven't had vacation in years.
Lester the Molester.Delete
FBI surrounds house of Saudi student following sightings of him with pressure cooker pot, only to find he was cooking riceReplyDelete
Student living in US questioned him about pressure cooker suspected to be bomb
Used to make traditional Saudi dish and taken the pressure cooker to other Saudi friend near his house
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2323316/FBI-surrounds-house-Saudi-student-following-sightings-pressure-cooker-pot-cooking-rice.html#ixzz2T86sRLkk
Another GD coverup.
It's Wild Rice.
Sucks to be in the Religion of Peace.Delete
Dowd is Clearer than Noonan:ReplyDelete
After his Libyan intervention, President Obama knew he was sending diplomats and their protectors into a country that was no longer a country, a land rife with fighters affiliated with Al Qaeda.
Yet in this hottest of hot spots, the State Department’s minimum security requirements were not met, requests for more security were rejected, and contingency plans were not drawn up, despite the portentous date of 9/11 and cascading warnings from the C.I.A., which had more personnel in Benghazi than State did and vetted the feckless Libyan Praetorian Guard. When the Pentagon called an elite Special Forces team three hours into the attack, it was training in Croatia — decidedly not a hot spot.
Hillary Clinton and Ambassador Chris Stevens were rushing to make the flimsy Benghazi post permanent as a sign of good faith with Libyans, even as it sat ringed by enemies.
The hierarchies at State and Defense had a plodding response, failing to make any superhuman effort as the siege waxed and waned over eight hours.
In an emotional Senate hearing on Wednesday, Stevens’s second-in-command, Gregory Hicks, who was frantically trying to help from 600 miles away in Tripoli, described how his pleas were denied by military brass, who said they could not scramble planes and who gave a “stand-down” order to four Special Forces officers in Tripoli who were eager to race to Benghazi.
My reaction was that, O.K., we’re on our own,” Hicks said quietly. He said the commander of that Special Forces team told him, “This is the first time in my career that a diplomat has more” chutzpah “than someone in the military.”Delete
So it was someone in the military that gave Hicks the order to stand down.
That person needs to be brought to light to know who gave him/her the directive.
I think the word actually uttered was "balls," not "chutzpah."Delete
I was thinking that too :)Delete
The dollar rose against major currencies as trading in Asia got under way, as investors wagered that the U.S.'s central bank would be the first to dial back stimulus measures.ReplyDelete
The dollar was slightly stronger against the euro, with one euro buying $1.2965, compared with $1.2990 late Friday. Against the yen, the move was more pronounced, with the dollar continuing to rally beyond the 100-yen mark.
Hayward Started this Avalanche of LeaksReplyDelete
CIA director David Petraeus was surprised when he read the freshly rewritten talking points an aide had emailed him in the early afternoon of Saturday, September 15. One day earlier, analysts with the CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis had drafted a set of unclassified talking points policymakers could use to discuss the attacks in Benghazi, Libya. But this new version—produced with input from senior Obama administration policymakers—was a shadow of the original.
The original CIA talking points had been blunt: The assault on U.S. facilities in Benghazi was a terrorist attack conducted by a large group of Islamic extremists, including some with ties to al Qaeda.
These were strong claims. The CIA usually qualifies its assessments, providing policymakers a sense of whether the conclusions of its analysis are offered with “high confidence,” “moderate confidence,” or “low confidence.” That first draft signaled confidence, even certainty: “We do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda participated in the attack.”
There was good reason for this conviction. Within 24 hours of the attack, the U.S. government had intercepted communications between two al Qaeda-linked terrorists discussing the attacks in Benghazi. One of the jihadists, a member of Ansar al Sharia, reported to the other that he had participated in the assault on the U.S. diplomatic post. Solid evidence. And there was more. Later that same day, the CIA station chief in Libya had sent a memo back to Washington, reporting that eyewitnesses to the attack said the participants were known jihadists, with ties to al Qaeda.
Everyone knows Obama has al Qaeda on the run.
Osama is dead, GM Lives!
Were the attackers, doug, from Libya or were they foreigners, there?Delete
My understanding was that they were Libyans, and that they were in Libya.
The telling line from Ms Dowd.
... from the C.I.A., which had more personnel in Benghazi than State did and vetted the feckless Libyan Praetorian Guard ...
The Libyan Praetorian Guard, that faded away, had been vetted by the CIA!
And the CIA had more people and more weapons.
Little wonder General P had to leave.
It was State, under Hillary's "leadership" that reduced our defenses there.Delete
Any of us newsreaders here w/a lick of sense knew the place was a death trap.
Did the CIA or the administration choose to rely on the Libyan Praetorian Guard?
Eyes wide shut.
Blame anyone but the folks at the controls.
Issa has stated that the hearings will continue. If true, they should call in witnesses from the CIA also. I heard that there are currently CIA contract workers who want to testify as whistleblowers. I'm all for it. Bring them on. If DOD screwed up, bring them into the hearings under oath also. The more light that is shown on the entire clusterfuck the better.
That being said, don't try to minimize the guilt of one group by pointing out the complicity of others. State, since it has security responsibility for all State Department facilities including Tripoli and Benghazi, is obviously involved in the overall coverup.
Throwing around inane statements like "And the CIA had more people and more weapons" doesn't help. We knew from day one that the CIA had more people in Benghazi than State did. The reason for their mission there was also speculated about. And of course they had more guns. It doesn't take our military expert to tell us that. We are talking of a bunch of diplomats at State versus a paramilitary force in the CIA. An interesting point in itself since during the latest hearing the acting HOM, Hicks indicated security concerns were so bad in Libya they were requesting that all State Department personnel located there be given arms training. A prescient suggestion in light of later events when they and their CIA compatriots were basically left to their own devices.
A top GOP critic pushed back Sunday on charges that Republican efforts to investigate last year's Benghazi attack are designed to inflict political damage on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.ReplyDelete
"Hillary Clinton's not a target," said House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa on NBC's Meet the Press. "President Obama is not a target."
What I don't understand is why don't the repubs just admit that they are legitimate targets in the political arena.Delete
To deny it just makes them look silly.
It seems like it's just one of those small polite rites we have developed in American political life when one side is trying to tear the guts out of the other.Delete
It's like Churchill saying about the Emperor of Japan when he sent him his fancy declaration of war: "If you are going to kill someone, you might as well be polite about it."
That's the wussiest thing that's ever come out of Issas's mouth.Delete
That's not how he became a Trillionaire.
Ambassador, not Emperor -ReplyDelete
>United Kingdom declaration of war on Japan (1941)
On 8 December 1941, the War Cabinet of His Majesty's Government authorized the immediate declaration of war on Japan, following the Japanese attacks on Malaya, Singapore and Hong Kong. The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Anthony Eden was in transit to Moscow at the time, so Winston Churchill was in charge of the Foreign Office. The text of his letter to the Japanese Ambassador was as follows:
On the evening of December 7th His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom learned that Japanese forces without previous warning either in the form of a declaration of war or of an ultimatum with a conditional declaration of war had attempted a landing on the coast of Malaya and bombed Singapore and Hong Kong.
In view of these wanton acts of unprovoked aggression committed in flagrant violation of International Law and particularly of Article I of the Third Hague Convention relative to the opening of hostilities, to which both Japan and the United Kingdom are parties, His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokyo has been instructed to inform the Imperial Japanese Government in the name of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom that a state of war exists between our two countries.
I have the honour to be, with high consideration,
Sir,Your obedient servant
Winston S. Churchill
Of the letter, Churchill later wrote: "Some people did not like this ceremonial style. But after all when you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."<
From his fb postReplyDelete
Taiwan and Philippines are fighting it out with internet attacks
No way to know how much is freelance vs officially sanctioned attacks. Meanwhile, Taiwan is sending more force to the area, including not just coastguard but navy.
Like · · Share · 143 · 17 minutes ago · 14
"Beijing, which is in the midst of border disputes with the Philippines in the South China Sea, protested the shooting on Friday in support of Taiwan, which it considers a breakaway Chinese province. A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Hua Chunying, called the shooting “brutal” and said China had requested an immediate explanation."Delete
New York City is going green — with ganja.ReplyDelete
“When we have intel on pretty big marijuana cases, we’re being pushed away,” said the source, who works on narcotics cases.
This year, only 60 kilos have been seized.
The dreaded 'I' word -ReplyDelete
>By KEVIN ROBILLARD | 5/10/13 5:29 PM EDT
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said the fatal attacks on American diplomats in Benghazi could lead to President Barack Obama’s impeachment during a radio interview Friday.
“People may be starting to use the I-word before too long,” Inhofe said during a discussion of Benghazi on “The Rusty Humphries Show.”
“I-word meaning ‘impeachment?’” Humphries asked.
“Yeah,” Inhofe said.
Humphries pointed out it was unlikely the Senate would vote to convict Obama even if the GOP-controlled House voted to impeach.
(Also on POLITICO: Collins: No impeachment over Benghazi)
“I understand that,” he said. “I’m not talking about it now. This is something that could last until after the 2014 elections. This is not a short story. … This is clearly an orchestrated cover-up.”<
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/inhofe-mulls-i-word-after-benghazi-91201.html#ixzz2T8xBZ6Y6
Impeachment hearings would keep the pot boiling for a l o n g time.
All the way to the elections of '14.
Seventeen people are injured, with 12 being treated for gunshot wounds following a shootout in the ‘second line’ of a parade on Mother’s Day in New Orleans. The youngest victim in the surprise attack was a 10 year old, who was grazed by a stray bullet.ReplyDelete
“There was a 10 year old girl we believe who suffered a graze wound, and she is in good condition and under care. Three to four people are in surgery right now, and we have no indication of what their condition is, but we also have no indications at this time that anyone will perish from today’s events,” New Orleans Police Department Superintendent Ronald Serpas told local station WDSU.
“The shots just started ringing out, and everybody just started running, and the next thing I heard, 10-15 people got shot,” one witness told WDSU.
Why the Hell did Churchill leave out Pearl Harbor?ReplyDelete
...no wonder they threw the bum out.
Even though he had an American mum, Pearl wasn't in his portfolio of responsibility. He left that up to FDR. After all, when you are going to kill a man, what does it cost to observe protocols?Delete
Quirk, as he is normally attired, was hired by Richard Branson to play Branson in drag -ReplyDelete
Good Enough for a Harvard Doctorate, but Fails the Politically Correct Test
A Heritage Foundation scholar has resigned after a firestorm erupted over his 2009 dissertation alleging Hispanics do not have “IQ parity with whites” and that Hispanic immigrants to the United States will have “low-IQ children and grandchildren.”
"Jason Richwine let us know he's decided to resign from his position," the conservative think tank said in a statement. "He's no longer employed by Heritage."
Richwine’s Harvard University dissertation, written before his employment at Heritage, asserted that an influx of "low-IQ" immigrants coming to the country would result in “a lack of socioeconomic assimilation among low-IQ immigrant groups, more underclass behavior, less social trust, and an increase in the proportion of unskilled workers in the American labor market."
Divercity, Sewage, and DeathReplyDelete
Sewage, strippers and Mariachis as Malcolm X's grandson lay dying
Two doors down from the Palace club, just past gay nightclub Divercity, garage attendant Mario Tzompantzi recalled how he had turned in for the night, bedding down in a tiny cubby hole where he guards patrons' keys.
"I woke up because there was a commotion. I could see him lying on the floor. There were lots of people crowded around him," Tzompantzi, 41, told Reuters.
"He was lying right there," he said, pointing to the kerb leading into the garage. A pool of greenish-yellow car radiator fluid now marks the spot. "I couldn't tell if he had been beaten up or run over by a car."
"He's dead?" he added, clearly shocked. "But he was alive there on the ground when the ambulance came and took him away."
He and others in the area described Palace as a brothel.
"When you go to a bar like that, you expose yourself," said Alberto Gomez, a spokesman for the Mexico City police.
Fights at Mexico City strip clubs are fairly frequent. Booze-fueled patrons who buy drinks for the women working in the clubs can find themselves confronted with staggering bills they cannot pay.
FAMILY AREA MEETS DARK UNDERBELLY...
What's a nice young man like Shabaaz, who burned his grandmother to death when he was 12, doing in a place like that anyways?ReplyDelete
Mrs. Malcom X, fried by her once-removed spawn.Delete
>On a scale of 1 to 10 (1 is smart and 10 is really dumb), we rate the IRS targeting "tea party & patriots" story as a triple 10! It ranks up there with Manny Ramirez "cutting off" a cut-off throw from the centerfielder to the shortstop!ReplyDelete
Of course, Manny's antics are funny and they happened on a baseball field. There is nothing funny about the IRS playing politics. This is even more scary now that we learn about the way that the IRS will work with ObamaCare:
"When Obamacare's individual mandate takes effect in 2014, all Americans who file income tax returns must complete an additional IRS tax form. The new form will require disclosure of a taxpayer's personal identifying health information in order to determine compliance with the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate." <
May 12, 2013
Dumb, illegal, and it started in 2011
Silvio Canto, Jr.
Dumb. Really dumb. That's what I think too. There is no real upside, and you know those groups targeted are going to start complaining. Some had filed lawsuits before this new broke. It is schoolyard bullying, nothing changes because of it, other than the perps will eventually get a black eye. How people can actually think Obama is smart is beyond me.
Anybody want these assholes in their medical life?
If you do, you are insane.
Administration Relying on Shoddy Benghazi Report to Absolve Itself of BlameReplyDelete
The White House has touted the Accountability Review Board (ARB) investigation of the Benghazi massacre as a review “led by two men of unimpeachable expertise and credibility that oversaw a process that was rigorous and unsparing.” In fact, the report was purposefully incomplete and willfully misleading.
The two men in charge of the ARB, Ambassador Thomas Pickering and Admiral Michael Mullen, a diplomat and military man respectively, have no meaningful investigative experience. Instead of letting the facts lead the direction of the investigation, the report appears designed to protect the interests of Hillary Clinton, the State Department higher ups, and the president.
A most obvious question is: why was Secretary Clinton never interviewed for the investigation? She is mentioned only once in the report, as the person who convened the Board. If, as Clinton herself has said, she took full responsibility for what happened in Benghazi, her decisions and decision-making process are materially relevant for investigating what happened before and during the night of September 11, 2012, and preventing what went wrong from ever happening again.
Other relevant questions the report does not answer are: How often did Clinton and President Obama speak during the attack? What decisions did the president make, and what orders did he give? What was the hour by hour participation of the president during the attack?
Call it “Oval Office Couch Syndrome.”ReplyDelete
By their second term “inside the bubble,” presidents have completely lost touch with reality: Aides and confidants conspire to keep the chief executive insulated from the real world — the bad news, the worse press coverage. They think it’s their job, and lounging on the Oval Office couches, they nod along with the president’s every musing.
But this presidency has taken OOCS to new heights. Mr. Obama has only a few trusted aides, and occasional leaks from the West Wing show a paranoid president suspicious of nearly everyone around him. Supremely confident, convinced by the fawning minions at his feet that he is untouchable, the president dismisses all controversy as partisan attacks by an overzealous opposition. A pliant press corps of stenographers follows in lockstep.
Carnival barker Jay Carney looked almost ashen Friday as he took the podium to face a suddenly invigorated press corps. Of course, the public briefing came after a private session with “reporters who matter,” a sure sign the White House is in full hunker-down mode — and, more precisely, terrified.
“Again,” one newly curious reporter asked, “what role did the White House play, not just in making but in directing changes that took place to these?”
“Well,” the carney said, “thank you for that question. The way to look at this, I think, is to start from that week and understand that in the wake of the attacks in Benghazi, an effort was underway to find out what happened, who was responsible. In response to a request from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to the CIA, the CIA began a process of developing points that could be used in public by members of Congress, by members of that committee. And that process, as is always the case — again, led by the CIA — involved input from a variety of …”
Enough. You get the point: Full Spin Cycle.
Speaking for the White House, the flack said the CIA was fully to blame for the talking points. Fully. “That is what was generated by the intelligence community, by the CIA,” he said.
For the record, this is what the CIA“generated”:
“Since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants.” That line was stricken: Everything was fine there — fine fine fine.
And: “We do know that Islamic extremists with ties to Al Qaeda participated in the attack.” That line, too, was deleted by … someone. Instead, this was inserted: “There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/12/curl-watch-out-petraeus-benghazi-scandal/#ixzz2T9aUoDtF