I feel better about our future for hearing this…..
On Monday, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) sent the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) a letter demanding that it immediately grant tax-exempt status to 10 Tea Party groups which have been zeroed in on for additional review. The ACLJ represents 27 Tea Party organizations nationwide. Of those, only 15 have been granted the tax-exempt status they applied for. The focus of the demand letter is the status of the 10 organizations that are pending. The ACLJ is calling for the IRS to respond by Friday, May 17th or face possible legal action.
“This is one of the most abhorrent breaches of trust imaginable,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. “We now know this coordinated intimidation scheme went beyond Tea Party groups to include Jewish organizations and even groups that discussed the Constitution. The IRS must be held accountable for this dishonest and notoriously disgraceful conduct. We are demanding that the IRS grant our remaining clients tax-exempt status immediately. If that does not occur by Friday, we will advise our clients of their right to sue the IRS for the redress of their grievances. The targeting scheme employed by the IRS not only violates their own rules and regulations, but is certain to result in a growing mistrust of the IRS by the American people.”
The ACLJ puts forth the following demands in its letter to the IRS Acting Commissioner:
(1) That the IRS approve immediately, and without further delay, the pending requests for either 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) tax exempt status of the following organizations: Albuquerque Tea Party, Allen Area Patriots, Greater Phoenix Tea Party Patriots, Greenwich Tea Party Patriots, Laurens County Tea Party, Linchpins of Liberty, Myrtle Beach Tea Party, North East Tarrant Tea Party, Patriots Educating Concerned Americans Now (PECAN), and Unite in Action.
(2) That the IRS identify and appropriately discipline all IRS employees who either concocted, knowingly carried out, knowingly failed to stop, or knowingly misinformed Congress or the public about, the scheme to target Tea Party and similar groups in violation of IRS rules and regulations, thereby unlawfully politicizing the IRS and its approval process.
- First, by singling out Tea Party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents violated the IRS mission to operate with integrity and fairness.
- Second, by singling out Tea Party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents violated the requirement to act impartially.
- And third, by singling out Tea Party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents engaged in dishonest, notoriously disgraceful conduct. The same can be said of IRS leaders who knew of, but failed to rein in, such biased, politically-motivated conduct, thereby allowing the politicization of the IRS.
- Agencies like the IRS must be scrupulously apolitical to retain the confidence and trust or the American people. With respect to its treatment of Tea Party and other conservative groups, the IRS failed miserably. The growing mistrust of the IRS is the inevitable (and totally understandable) result of its unwise actions.
Sekulow has indicated that many of the questions asked by the IRS are simply inappropriate and fall well outside the scope of legitimate IRS inquiry. A sampling of those questions can be found here.
Additionally, the ACLJ has launched a national petition calling on President Obama and members of Congress to hold those responsible for this conduct accountable. You can sign the petition here: Petition to End IRS Abuse.
Then too, Attorney General Eric Holder has ordered a Justice Department probe into the matter. Holder said the FBI is coordinating with the Department of Justice to see if any laws have been broken, and referred to it as “outrageous and unacceptable.”
Rep. Dave Camp, (R-MI), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, along with Rep. Sander Levin (D-MI), ranking member of Ways and Means, announced that a hearing will be held on the IRS situation on Friday. And, Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), Senate Finance Committee chairman said in a statement: “The IRS should be prepared for a full investigation into this matter by the Senate Finance Committee.”
Darrell Issa (R-CA) is planning to hold hearings on the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration report which is located here.
“Let’s go through it,” Issa said. “Let’s see what the instituted changes need to be to make this not happen again.”
President Obama’s lies continue to pile up in regard to Benghazi. Yesterday he claimed that they were calling it terrorism three days after to point. There is plenty of video on YouTube and other places that say otherwise. The low information voters and the people who don’t pay attention might not remember it but those that do pay attention to the lies this regime continued for weeks and months afterwards.
Here is his answer to a question during the press conference with Prime Minister David Cameron on May 13,2013. Remember what he says because I will show you later that this is just a pack of lies.
Here is Obama and Clinton on September 12th(the day after)
Ambassador Rice talks 5 days later on all the Sunday news shows about a protest outside Benghazi consulate which people on the ground there say never took place.
Listen to Obama here two weeks later on the view.
and here on Univision 9 days after the attack he still blames it on protests about the stupid video.
Gregory Hicks was on the ground in Tripoli and he said it was always thought to be a terrorist attack and that he told the White House and State department such and the President of Libya agreed with him on all the shows Rice was on that Sunday.
The day after the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks president Obama said: “Make no mistake. We will work with the Libyan government to bring justice to the killers who attacked our people.” But, more than seven months later, there are no indictments and no arrests. According to a House Republican Conference report on the Benghazi attacks, FBI investigators have made “very little progress.”
In fact, the only one who has actually been apprehended and locked up is the filmmaker who, it was determined, was not responsible for inciting the violence in Benghazi. Meanwhile, the actual suspects are still at large.
Sufyan Ben Qumu, is believed to have been involved and may be the ringleader of the attacks. Qumu has been recently spotted in Libya. Released from the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in 2007 Qumu was then transferred into Libyan custody on the condition he be kept in jail. He was released, however, by the Qaddafi regime as part of its reconciliation effort with Islamists in 2008. One of the suspects in the attack was detained in Tunisia but was released before he could be captured or questioned by U.S. investigators.
The FBI recently released images of three individuals who were on the grounds of the U.S. Special Mission in Benghazi when it was attacked in September. The images are of men who may be able to provide information to help the FBI’s investigation. Additionally, a webpage was launched by the FBI in order to solicit tips in the region. Also provided is a companion Facebook page which is in Arabic. The webpage, fbi.gov/benghazi, includes images, tip forms, and posters in Arabic and English, as well as an e-mail address, email@example.com, for submissions of confidential information to investigators. The site also includes a video featuring an Arabic speaker soliciting tips from the region.
A source told Fox News, however, that the government is “sitting on” information. ”We basically don’t want to upset anybody, and the problem is, if Ambassador Stevens’ family knew that we were sitting on information about the people who killed their son, their brother, on and on, then, and we could look them as a government in the face, then we’re messing up. We’re messing up.” the source said.
Fox News spoke exclusively with one special operator who watched the events unfold in real time and has debriefed those who were part of the response:
“He remains anonymous for his safety and has decided to talk because he says he and others connected with the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks in Benghazi are frustrated with the excuses and lack of a military response since Stevens and three other Americans were killed.
‘We have all the capability, all the training, all the capacity, to kill and capture not only terrorists involved, with the specific events of 9/11, and Ambassador Stevens’ death, but terrorists that are feeding other regions including Europe that could eventually affect our national security in the short term,’ the source said. ‘And we’re not talking midterm or long-term, this is the short-term.’
Another threat is a larger terrorist haven that continues to build in parts of Libya and North Africa. Those working the region in the interest of U.S. security say the ball is being dropped by top leaders at the White House, Pentagon and State Department.
‘The analysts, the intelligence experts all say the same thing, that if we just ignore the situation as it presents itself, eventually it will be another invasion will have to take place for us to eventually turn the tide.’”
The group the FBI is pursuing is Ansar al Sharia, an offshoot of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Ansar al-Sharia means “Partisans of Islamic law” in Arabic. The terrorist organization was formed by AQAP in response to the growing youth movement in Yemen, which has marginalized Salafi-jihadists who support the violent overthrow of the government and the establishment of an Islamic state.
Ansar al Sharia remains active in Benghazi, operating patrols and checkpoints. According to military officials it is also working in collusion with other Islamist groups, allowing it to operate openly. The group, “continues to spread its ideology in the Benghazi area, particularly targeting youth,” said one official, who acknowledged that the lack of central government security was the why the militia is able to thrive.
In terms of apprehending the suspects, Deputy chief of Mission in Libya, Gregory Hicks, told the House Oversight Committee at Wednesday’s hearing on Benghazi, that the administration’s claims regarding an impromptu protest in Benghazi (which were in direct contradiction to statements made by Libyan prime minister Mohammed al-Magarief) hampered the FBI’s investigation by breeding resistance from Libyan authorities. Also problematic is that when asked whether he had been interviewed by the FBI in the course of its investigation, Hicks said that he had not. Hicks explained that the FBI was delayed in getting to the consulate and that evidence had not been secured.
Susan Rice’s description of the attack as spontaneous, “made achieving the objective of getting the FBI to Benghazi very, very difficult,” Hicks said.
BENGHAZI – THE BIGGEST COVER-UP SCANDAL IN U.S. HISTORY? – WAS BENGHAZI A CIA GUN-RUNNING OPERATION FOR MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD & OTHER INSURGENTS FIGHTING IN SYRIA?
LibertyNEWS.com – Editorial Team Special Report
It’s never fun to admit you’ve been lied to and duped. There is no comfort in realizing a high-level group in government has conned you. The wound created from such a realization would be deep and painful when paired with extraordinary insult when you realize the cons are people you not only trusted, but people who are tasked with protecting your rights, your liberty, your life.
When these people betray you, you’re in trouble – big trouble. Unfortunately, we believe America is being betrayed by powerful individuals tasked with our protection. These people are found in the White House, the Congress, the CIA and other government entities – and they’re lying to you. Then they’re covering it up on an epic scale, in a never-before-seen manner.
Here are the basics of what the schemers in government and the complicit media would like for us all to focus on and buy into:
- Why wasn’t there better security at the consulate (keep this misleading word in mind) in Benghazi?
- Why didn’t authorization come to move special forces in for protection and rescue?
- Why was an obscure video blamed when everyone knew the video had nothing to do with it?
- Did Obama’s administration cover-up the true nature of the attacks to win an election?
Truth is, as we’re starting to believe, the above questions are convenient, tactical distractions. And truth is, answers to these questions, if they ever come, will never lead to revelations of the REAL TRUTH and meaningful punishment of anyone found responsible.
Rep. Darrell Issa knows this, members of the House Committee investigating the Benghazi attacks know this, the White House knows this, and much of the big corporate media infrastructure knows it, too. How do they know it? Because they know the truth. They know the truth, but cannot and/or will not discuss it in public.
Here are the basics that we (America, in general) should be focusing on, but aren’t:
- Why do media outlets continue to refer to the “Special Mission Benghazi Compound” as a consulate?
- Where are the so-called “terrorist” attackers/murderers? Have we stopped looking for them?
- Who and where are the rest of the survivors and those evacuated after the attack?
- Why did the attackers know they should target the Special Mission Benghazi Compound, and what was their true intention – what did they really want?
- Why is there now so little discussion of the role the CIA played in the facilities that were attacked?
- Why were 23 of the 30 American officials evacuated from Benghazi active within the CIA? Only 7 of the 30 worked for the State Department? Yet the media continue to characterize the Benghazi facility as a State Department installation?
- Was the CIA Annex a facility used in a secret gun-running operation, and was Ambassador Chris Stevens involved?
- Was the CIA Annex used to facilitate the flow of arms to (Muslim Brotherhood) insurgents fighting in Syria and possibly beyond?
- Why are there two versions of the ARB (Accountability Review Board) Report? One is unclassified for public view, the other is highly classified, and while Congress can view it, they are legally forbidden to discuss it in public hearings or in news interviews.
We obviously don’t have answers to all of these questions, but we will provide you with an overview, some context and our reasoning for each of them.
THE “SPECIAL MISSION BENGHAZI COMPOUND”
According to public documents the State Department made available to Congress, Ambassador Stevens arrived in Benghazi on September 10th, 2012. The first order of business for Stevens was an urgent meeting at the CIA annex (We’ll discuss possibilities for this meeting later). Stevens was then escorted to the Special Mission Benghazi Compound, which had a villa that would be utilized for Stevens and his staff during their stay. The Special Mission Benghazi Compound did house a handful of State Department officials, but was also host to CIA operatives and officials. The Special Mission Benghazi Compound was not an actual embassy or consulate office and was not actually used as such.
The constant reference to the Special Mission Benghazi Compound as a “consulate” leads the casual news reader to believe the Ambassador may have worked out of this office as a facility made available for traditional, more public type of diplomatic operations. This was likely not the case in Benghazi. Stevens was not “stationed” at this facility. If you believe this to be an actual embassy type consulate office, you can also easily accept that the attack on September 11th was an attack meant simply for the purpose of projecting terror.
If you accept the premise this is an act of terror on the anniversary of 9/11, you’ll likely also accept the premise this is not the fault of the U.S. government. Questions will become fewer, those responsible will quietly slip away.
THE WELL ARMED MURDERERS – WHERE ARE THEY?
This question has no answers. Only a maze of peculiar dead ends. As a reminder, a United States Ambassador was brutally murdered. Where are the calls for those who killed him? Where are the hearings demanding that intelligence agencies give us an idea of where the investigation stands? Have we walked away from an aggressive pursuit of the killers? Have we concluded it was an “angry mob” who committed an act of terror and thus closed the books?
THE SURVIVORS AND OFFICIALS EVACUATED
Here we are eight months down the road from the 9/11/12 attack in Benghazi. We still have yet to discover the true identities of the many people evacuated. We keep saying they should be called up for hearings and questioned, yet they all seem to have vanished. Perhaps – and this is just something to consider, the government is not hiding them so they won’t speak… these people do not wish to speak because they know full well what was happening and what the consequences of disclosure could be. In fact, it’s very likely they were an integral part of what was being orchestrated from the Benghazi facilities, whatever that might be.
The calls for these individuals to be brought forward assume we accept the premise of an active, traditional consulate. In that, we think of it as an office where interns and passport staff may be working. Of course, interns and standard office staff would indeed be of great value in gathering intelligence to figure out what happened. But the Benghazi facilities were staffed by a few State Department personnel and many CIA operatives – not interns and standard consulate administration staffers.
These individuals didn’t want to go public with classified information before the attack, so why would they after the attack?
With regards to the whistleblowers who just testified to Congress, these guys were, for the most part, involved in security and/or related assignments. We see no reason to think the whistleblowers would have detailed knowledge of the CIA operations we believe were underway in Benghazi. Perhaps they were aware of CIA presence in Benghazi, but there is no doubt a strong CIA presence all over the Middle East.
WHAT WAS THE REAL REASON FOR THE CHOSEN TARGET OF ATTACK?
A Wall Street Journal article published before the classified government report/gag order was issued (one of only a few such articles in existence about the facilities) claims the Special Mission Benghazi Compound was set up for no purpose other than to function as a diplomatic front for the CIA. It’s possible the Special Mission Benghazi Compound was not only a front, but was actually a CIA facility operating under the cover of a State Department facility. This is not certain, however, but we do believe the information and activities at this facility were far less sensitive than that of the CIA annex. We believe this to be the case based on the actions taken by the CIA in the days following the attack on the compound.
The CIA immediately jumped into action, scrubbing the annex facility of any trace of CIA operations. All documents, files, traces of a clandestine presence in general, were completely removed and/or destroyed. Yet, the Special Mission Benghazi Compound was left unguarded and wide open for “looters”. And remember how long it took (weeks) for FBI investigators to be allowed in? Investigators who stayed a surprisingly short time and apparently came away with little or nothing?
There are other questions surrounding what then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knew. You may recall that in the days following the attack, Hillary Clinton was oddly silent. Clinton was essentially hidden from the media, from Congress and/or anyone else with questions about the State Department’s role (or knowledge) in/of the attacks. The WSJ said “at 5:41 PM Eastern time, Mrs. Clinton called Mr. Petraeus. She wanted to make sure the two agencies were on the same page.” It’s entirely possible the State Department was fuzzy on what had actually happened and why. This lends even more credibility to the idea the Special Mission Benghazi Compound was simply a front for the broader CIA operations.
We do not assert the attackers went after the wrong facility, but certainly propose it be considered a possibility. Or, at the very least, might have assumed the facility had more significance. (It’s also possible they were searching for Stevens himself.)
Which brings us to the dirtiest of all possibilities. What we’re about to discuss could certainly be all coincidence, but the algorithm required for it to all be coincidence seems outside the realm of reality. Let’s get back to the arrival of Stevens in Benghazi.
WHY DID STEVENS ARRIVE IN BENGHAZI ON SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2012?
We mentioned Stevens arrived in Benghazi, Libya on September 10th, 2012, one day before the attack. Stevens immediately attended a classified meeting at the CIA annex before checking in at the Special Mission Benghazi Compound, where he would be staying while in Benghazi. According to the documents obtained by Congress, Stevens later met with an official from an outfit called Al Marfa Shipping and Maritime Services as well as an individual from the Arabian Gulf Oil Co. The final meeting of the evening took place with Ali Sait Akin, Turkey’s Consulate General to Benghazi.
Please keep this sequence of meetings at the front of your mind: CIA, Al Marfa Shipping and Maritime, Arabian Gulf Oil and Turkey.
The visit by Stevens came just 8 days after General David Petraeus, who was then head of the CIA, made a surprise visit to Ankara on September 2nd, 2012. The time of the General’s arrival in Ankara jives with the timeline mentioned in an article published by the Times of London. The article, published on September 14th, 2012, discusses the arrival of a certain ship at the Turkish Port of Iskenderun. Fox News had more (But, strangely, Fox News dropped the investigation and no longer mentions the discovery).
Through shipping records, Fox News has confirmed that the Libyan-flagged vessel Al Entisar, which means “The Victory,” was received in the Turkish port of Iskenderun — 35 miles from the Syrian border — on Sept. 6, just five days before Ambassador Chris Stevens, information management officer Sean Smith and former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed during an extended assault by more than 100 Islamist militants.
The ship, which was coming from Libya, had curious cargo on board. From the same Fox News story.
According to an initial Sept. 14 report by the Times of London, Al Entisar was carrying 400 tons of cargo. Some of it was humanitarian, but also reportedly weapons, described by the report as the largest consignment of weapons headed for Syria’s rebels on the frontlines.
“This is the Libyan ship … which is basically carrying weapons that are found in Libya,” said Walid Phares, a Fox News Middle East and terrorism analyst. “So the ship came all the way up to Iskenderun in Turkey. Now from the information that is available, there was aid material, but there were also weapons, a lot of weapons.”
The cargo reportedly included surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles, RPG’s and Russian-designed shoulder-launched missiles known as MANPADS.
The following part is extremely important and is what may connect the Petraeus visit to that of Stevens.
The ship’s Libyan captain told the Times of London that “I can only talk about the medicine and humanitarian aid” for the Syrian rebels. It was reported there was a fight about the weapons and who got what “between the free Syrian Army and the Muslim Brotherhood.”
This wasn’t just any fight. The Times of London said “the scale of the shipment and how it should be disbursed, has sparked a row between the FSA and the Muslim Brotherhood, who took control of the shipment when it arrived in Turkey.” Reports suggest a large portion of the shipment was indeed smuggled across the Syrian border, but much of the weapons were caught up in infighting amongst the Syrian insurgents. The Muslim Brotherhood had significant ties with Turkey and, from what we see in reports, were able to secure the ship and its cargo.
THE TIMELINE THE WHITE HOUSE DOESN’T WANT YOU TO FOCUS ON
So we’ve established a solid timeline here.
- SEPT 2, 2012 – General Petraeus, head of CIA, arrives in Turkey on September 2nd and meets with Turkey’s President and top Turkish government officials.
- SEPT 6, 2012 – On September 6th, a ship carrying 400 tons of cargo (much of it being arms), arrives from Libya. The ship is secured by Muslim Brotherhood operatives, due to connections with Turkish government. Other Syrian insurgent groups are furious and want control of the weapons.
- SEPT 10, 2012 – Ambassador Stevens arrives in Benghazi, has meetings with CIA, the shipping company and a government official from Turkey.
From what we can tell, the attacks on the compound where Stevens was located began around an hour after the meeting with a Turkish official ended. On September 11th, 2012, Stevens was killed (very early morning hours).
THE POSSIBLE CHRISTOPHER STEVENS CIA/GUN-RUNNING CONNECTION
The unclassified version of the ARB report provides some fascinating and under-reported details about Christopher Stevens. The September situation was in no way his first experience with Benghazi. In fact, Stevens had a presence at the CIA annex before the Special Mission Benghazi Compound was created. Stevens was at the CIA annex in the summer of 2011, shortly before the CIA created the Special Mission Benghazi Compound, the facility that eventually became the diplomatic front for the CIA’s operations in Benghazi. Stevens was not, at the time, Ambassador to Libya. At the time Stevens was the Special Representative to the Libyan Rebel-Alliance.
According to the New York Times, Stevens had even dealt with applications coming from U.S. weapons dealers requesting licenses to sell arms to Libyan insurgents.
There is a history of Stevens’ involvement in weapons used by Libyan fighters. There is also history of Stevens’ involvement in CIA operations. There appears to be massive movement of Libya-based arms, through Turkish territory, into the hands of Muslim Brotherhood fighters opposing the Assad government in Syria. There was controversy over a shipment of arms involving the Muslim Brotherhood and other Syrian insurgent groups, and an hour after a day of meetings ended, the compound in Libya came under attack.
Meanwhile, virtually all of the narratives circulating here in America surround the failed response to the attacks, the lack of security and the fact it was all blamed on a YouTube video.
WHY IS CONGRESS REFUSING TO ASK THESE QUESTIONS?
The most likely answer here is that members of Congress know the answers and they understand how extremely risky their disclosure would be. That said, because of the level of classification involved, Congress cannot legally answer the questions, or even ask the questions of someone who may know the answers. Especially in a public hearing or in a media interview.
This would explain why current Congressional hearings focus on the response, or lack thereof, not the true reason the attacks happened in the first place.
THE LIES AND THE COVER-UP
We don’t like having to say this, but we’re all very likely being lied to, repeatedly and recklessly. Very little, if anything, we’re being told about why Benghazi happened is true or relevant. Are we alleging the above is 100 percent accurate? Not at all. We do believe it all plays a part, either directly or indirectly, in the attack, in the murders that took place in Benghazi on September 11th, 2012, and in the deceitful cover-up orchestrated by the government and thrust on the American people. Yet, not a single person who is elected to protect our lives and our rights is, so far, willing to say it.
This story does not provide all the answers, but hopefully it provokes the correct kind of questions.
We ALL need to be asking them.
Please share this post with all your friends. It is imperative that as many people see this as possible.
Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based international cable network, will open 12 new bureaus in various locations across the U.S. The goal of the news outlet’s aggressive expansion is to become a household name in America.
The launch of the new bureaus will begin in the summer. In addition to expansion in New York City, bureaus will open in Nashville, Denver, New Orleans, San Francisco, Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami, Dallas, Seattle, Detroit and Washington, D.C.
Dawud Walid, executive director of Hamas-Linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said he believes Al Jazeera America in Detroit is a positive development for the local Muslim community. “I believe Al Jazeera coming here to the heart of Muslim America can play a productive role in showing a clearer image of who we are as Muslims.”
Al Jazeera has 70 divisions around the world and has been criticized for being a propaganda tool. The network is partially backed by a grant from the Qatari government–which is a contributor to Hamas, in Gaza. The owner of Aljazeera, the emir of Qatar, has donated 400 million dollars to Hamas, a State Department designated terrorist group.
During an October 2012 visit by Qatari emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani to the southern Gaza strip, the emir agreed to an investment of $400 million to rebuild the Gaza Strip which sustained damage during Operation: Cast Lead, between Israel and Gaza terrorist groups in 2008.
“The emir agreed to increase Qatari investment from $254 million to $400 million,” Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya announced during a press conference. “Today we demolish the wall of the blockade through this visit, thank you Qatar,” he added.
James Simpson, in a RedState article, provides examples of Al Jazeera’s anti-American propaganda and terrorist connections. A few highlights:
- Film footage of captured terrorists in Iraq demonstrates intent; they arrived to kill Americans because of Al Jazeera.
- NBC’s Lisa Myers, in an article, wrote: “Why do they go? Saudis captured in Iraq say it’s because of pictures on Arab television network Al-Jazeera. We saw the Americans massacring the Iraqis,” said one Saudi prisoner in Iraq…”
- According to CNN, a document found in bin Laden’s compound following his death referred to a meeting with the Al Jazeera bureau chief in Pakistan.
- 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was protected by the government of Qatar, which funds Al Jazeera.
Cliff Kincaid, president of America’s Survival, Inc. and director of the Accuracy in Media (AIM) Center for Investigative Journalism, refers to Al-Jazeera as an “enemy propaganda network that has served as a mouthpiece for terrorist groups.” Those terrorist groups would include Al-Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah.
Kincaid told The Clarion Project’s Ryan Mauro, in an interview, that, “at a time when Americans are increasingly concerned about gun violence and the murder of innocents, Al Jazeera wants access to tens of millions of American homes to promote its own brand of anti-American violence and terrorism. For the sake of our loved ones, we have to say no.” Kincaid went on to explain that Al Jazeera could inspire jihadism in America in the same way it has incited anti-American terrorism abroad.
Lebanon’s Al Manar TV has already been banned from the U.S. because it was found to be part of Hezbollah. So, in the same way, a hearing should have been held to determine if Al Jazeera should be banned due to its obvious ties to terrorism. Keep in mind, Al-Jazeera was the voice piece of Osama bin Laden. And, though we are not at war with Qatar, we are at war with the jihadists being supported by Qatar.
What needs to be investigated is why Al Jazeera’s broadcasts in the U.S. aren’t treated by cable and satellite providers as foreign propaganda under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Also in question is why public television stations are turning their broadcast time over to Al Jazeera and other foreign channels, in violation of Federal Communications Commission rules. Additionally, the deal bringing Al Jazeera into the U.S. was not reported to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS) of the Treasury Department, which is a violation of the law.
In as much as these are significant concerns, it did not persuade Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA), chairman of the Republican Study Committee (RSC), to call for investigation of Al Jazeera. Citing the First Amendment, Scalise said that Al Jazeera has the right to expand its broadcasts in the United States and that there are no grounds for a congressional investigation of Al Gore’s deal with Al Jazeera.
In the U.S., it is against the law to provide material support to terrorists, with “material support” defined as including expert advice or assistance and communications equipment. Consider the fact that during World War II, Tokyo Rose along with Axis Sally broadcast anti-American diatribes from overseas but were apprehended by U.S. authorities after the war, charged with treason and sent to prison. Similarly, the U.S. is officially still at war with global terrorism, but Al Gore provided supporter of terrorism, Al Jazeera, an opportunity to continue its campaign of anti-American, pro-jihadists propaganda on American soil.
Last December, Al Jazeera ran a story about the “gentle” al Qaeda terrorists in Mali who kidnapped and killed three Americans. With statements like this having been and the news organization’s ties to terrorism, there is good reason for concern regarding Al Jazeera’s potential for inciting home grown terrorism.
Senator Cruz won’t back off, thankfully
In the primary for Republican Senator for Texas last year, Ted Cruz finished second to David Dewhurst. Although it was a let down, Dewhurst didn’t get more than 50% of the vote insuring a runoff between the two. In the runoff I talked about the change needed in Washington with my friends and explained to them that Dewhurst would be more of the same old spineless Republicans representing the majority of Americans in the Senate. While running for the Senate seat left open by Kay Bailey Hutchison’s retirement Cruz ran on a platform of Constitutional Government and Strong Defense.
Since winning the election and becoming the junior Senator from Texas, Cruz has made a name for himself by holding the regime and their liberal cronies in the Senate and elsewhere accountable to their words and made them uncomfortable with his persistent questions on the constitutionality of the President’s policies. The left’s media attacks him and calls him an extremist. Standing up for personal rights and liberties of the individual in the United States is now classified as extreme by Democrats, media and even some in his own party. That says a lot about how far we have slipped away from the Constitution.
He has made Senator John Cornyn a stronger conservative by his presence in the Senate also. Texas has two Senators that I will put up against those from any state. He has not wavered once from his promises to the state when he ran for the office and that is rare indeed in these times. I hope his speech today is a starting point for his “Opportunity Conservatism” campaign. I hope that all will join me in support of Senators Cruz, Paul, Lee, Rubio and others that take a stand against the assault of freedoms that this regime has undertaken since taking power in 2009.
America is great because of the rights, freedoms and liberties of the individual and not because of the permissions bestowed on them by the government. It is time for all citizens both from the right and left to join together and take our country back to the basics of a constitutional government of the past. In the past 50 years this country has slipped step by step towards a socialist form of government. It is time to stop the Marxists from taking control permanently and bring America back to the “Shining city on the hill” that President Reagan spoke of.
Today Senator Cruz gives the keynote speech at CPAC around 4:10 central. If you can watch this speech and listen to what he says. It is high time for someone to speak on our part and bring the conservative ideals that we hold so dear out in the open to the masses. We haven’t had a great messenger since Ronald Reagan.
Riyadh denies warning US on Boston explosions
Saudi Arabia has denied claims that it had warned the US about Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the two men suspected of the Boston terror explosions. The denial issued by the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia in Washington was in response to a report published on Wednesday by Daily Mail’s MailOnline that “the Saudis sent a written warning about Tsarnaev to the US Department of Homeland Security in 2012.”
The Homeland Security and the White House also denied the accounts. The MailOnline reported that an official, referred to as “a highly placed source”, talked about “a written warning from the Saudi government to the Department of Homeland Security,” and said “he had direct knowledge of that document.”
The official reportedly said that “the Saudis’ warning was separate from the multiple red flags raised by Russian intelligence in 2011, and was based on human intelligence developed independently in Yemen.”
“Citing security concerns, the Saudi government also allegedly denied an entry visa to the elder Tsarnaev brother in December 2011, when he hoped to make a pilgrimage to Makkah,” the report said. However, the Saudi embassy rejected the claims about the document to the Americans and the visa application.’’ “The Saudi government had no prior information about the Boston bombers,” the embassy said.
Why would they deny this so
I read a post yesterday saying Sens. Cruz, Lee and Paul should have let Obama’s gun bill fail in the Democrat controlled Senate and Republican controlled House because it would hurt the regime politically. Since when has anything this President ever failed to do come back to bite him? With the media shielding him from blame and always blaming things on Bush or the GOP in general it will never happen. Even if it would have failed without the threat of a filibuster from above mentioned Senators they still would have blamed the GOP.
The way I see it with this lamestream media we have and all the low information voters across America we have to take on the President and his lackeys in the Senate any and all ways possible. The Constitution warrants such defense and who cares if the establishment GOP get their feelings hurt. I know we all can agree that we don’t care about the feelings of Feinstein, Boxer, Reid and the other Marxists that were behind such a bill.
People whining like McCain, Graham and any other Republicans need to grow a set and start standing up for the rights we as Americans are blessed to have in this country. They might speak for their constituents but they don’t speak for those that think highly of the rights we enjoy as Americans. They think we can make a point by just letting bills get voted down the old fashioned way. When has this worked in the last 5 years?
I salute any and all politicians making a stand for the Constitution any way they can. I don’t care what the gang of eight Republicans or the media thinks. It’s about time we had someone who will stand up and shout enough.
The first one is from Texas Senator Ted Cruz.
The next one is from Sarah Palin.
This one is from Judge Jeanine Pirro.
This one is from former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum.
To finish the viewing I include an emotional speech byTaya Kyle, Chris Kyle’s widow.