Folks, It is about time for serious Reality Check because wisdom is calling at everyones door. We must be wise and act wisely in everything we want in this God given world. It is very sad that the GOP Repubs and the Conservative group launches robocall campaign to impeach President Obama.........Is there an engineering going on that we do not know.....? Was there a conspiracy theory going on against President Obama simply because he is black, Racial conspiracy against any black who do not prescribe to their liking ??? Is that why President Obama is being hated with a passion however much he tries to do good..?? Is this it, that the Rich and Powerful have a direct ticket to intimidate and oppress as they wish and please, and that they must have their way by hooks and crooks in the Free Trading Enterprising ??? Will the Truth be known ??? People, it is wrong to buy into this theory of conspiracy if truely the spanners are at work........The enemies of America's progress and success are keenly watching and waiting to strike upon our weakest point of vulnerability.....People must wake up and ask, who will benefits when America is devided and is fully destrited frin selfishness and greed of the minority Rich and Wealthy.......??? We must not give the Enemy an opportunity to devide and destroy our peace we share in unity...............The world need peace and the world is looking for America to lead and unite the world under peace, and we cannot afford to be destructed..... Wake up people, wake up.....!!!...The last thing America want is war by itself, or war in its own house........... Wisdom is calling.......There is only one thing we miss to be able to solve and fix our problem....It is Love.....if we love, we shall not hate, if we love, we shall care and share in the goodness and beauty of livelihood and survival.......if we love, together we shall cooperate to build what makes America respected and loved in the whole world...... Then we will care to consider that Elections are over, it is time to unite to build our future the best way we know how......cooperating in Nation Building........!!! Cheers everybody........ Judy Miriga Diaspora Spokesperson Executive Director Confederation Council Foundation for Africa Inc., USA http://socioeconomicforum50.blogspot.com Gen. Petraeus Testimony Ends GOP Benghazi Scandal Or Does It? Published on Nov 17, 2012 by Tomthunkit Disgraced former spy chief David Petraeus testified Friday that the CIA knew from the beginning that terrorists were behind the deadly Benghazi attack. But they downplayed that detail in their talking points to avoid tipping off the Al Qaeda affiliates they were chasing. The revelation raised a fusillade of questions from lawmakers, including Republicans critical of the Obama administration's flip-flop explanations of the attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. General Petraeus, according to King and other lawmakers who attended the hearings, said they didn't want to alert Ansar al-Shariah and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb that U.S. intelligence was on their trail. Petraeus was asked at the outset of the Friday meetings whether the scandal that ruined his once sterling reputation would affect his testimony. "He said no," King said. Then Petraeus proceeded to explain why UN Ambassador Susan Rice was given talking points that blamed the deadly attack on demonstrations over an anti-Muslim video rather than on a specific terrorist organization. She conducted a series of interviews beginning five days after the attack. He insisted the decision had nothing to do with the presidential campaign and that he was under no pressure from the Obama administration, which was touting the killing of Osama Bin Laden and other top Al Qaeda terrorists. "The general was adamant there was no politicization of the process, no White House interference or political agenda," said Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif). "He completely debunked that idea." The White House has been under fire for giving conflicting accounts of what sparked the violence in Libya that resulted in the deaths of Stevens and three other Americans. Critics said Americans were misled. Republicans, in particular, have been crying coverup. GBR: General Petraeus testimony Published on Nov 16, 2012 by ThomasPaine3 Who wrote the "talking points" for General Petraeus? Testimony update... Mccain hides behind Petraeus to attack Obama (Part 1) Paula Broadwell on Women in Afghanistan #waywire Published on Oct 8, 2012 by Waywire Author and activist Paula Broadwell at the Condordia Summit discussing what's facing women in Afghanistan and how anyone can get involved. BookTV: Paula Broadwell and Vernon Loeb, "All In: The Education of General David Petraeus" Published on Mar 12, 2012 by BookTV Paula Broadwell and Vernon Loeb talk about David Petraeus' military career and his impact on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Gen. Petraeus gave the authors access to him and his team for the book. Hosted by Politics and Prose in Washington, DC. During affair, Paula Broadwell praised Petraeus' 'wonderful marriage' with his wife Holly Published on Nov 12, 2012 by Charlie Spiering During affair, Paula Broadwell praised Petraeus' 'wonderful marriage' with his wife Holly Mccain hides behind Petraeus to attack Obama (Part 2) Frost over the World - General David Petraeus Uploaded by AlJazeeraEnglish on Oct 17, 2010 General David Petraeus, the commander of ISAF and US forces in Afghanistan, talks about the Taliban, the planned troop withdrawal and what would constitute victory in this war. In Benghazi testimony, Petraeus says al Qaeda role known earlyBy Susan Cornwell and Tabassum Zakaria | Reuters – Fri, Nov 16, 2012
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Former CIA Director David Petraeus told Congress on Friday that he and the spy agency had sought to make clear from the outset that September's deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, involved an al Qaeda affiliate, lawmakers said. Petraeus told lawmakers that "there were extremists in the group" that launched the attack on the diplomatic mission, describing them as affiliates of al Qaeda and other groups, said Representative C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee. "The fact is that he clarified it," Ruppersberger said. Petraeus appeared behind closed doors before the House and Senate intelligence panels the week after quitting his CIA post because of an extramarital affair. He made no public remarks. Another lawmaker, Republican Representative Peter King, said Petraeus' account in the closed-door session differed from the assessment the CIA chief gave to Congress two months ago, just days after the September 11 attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. "He also stated that he thought all along he made it clear that there were significant terrorist involvement, and that is not my recollection of what he told us on September 14," King said. Petraeus admitted last week to an affair with his biographer, Paula Broadwell. Lawmakers said a somber Petraeus told them his resignation had nothing to do with issues related to Benghazi or any reluctance to testify before Congress. "The general did not address any specifics of the affair, of that issue," Democratic Representative Jim Langevin said. "What he did say in his opening statement was that he regrets the circumstances that led to his resignation." The assault on the U.S. mission and nearby CIA annex in Benghazi has turned into a flash point between Democratic President Barack Obama and Republicans. Republicans accuse the White House and in particular the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, of misleading the public just after the attack by suggesting the assault was a spontaneous act instead of a planned terrorist operation. The Obama administration denies misleading anyone and says it discussed information about the Benghazi tragedy as it came in. Some Republicans have suggested the administration initially wanted to avoid the idea that it had failed to prevent a terrorist attack, which might have dampened the president's re-election chances on November 6. Obama, who won a second term, has denied that implication. King said that unclassified talking points about the attack prepared by the CIA for use by lawmakers, and apparently relied on by Rice, originally pointed specifically to al Qaeda involvement, but were edited before being cleared for use. "The original talking points were much more specific about al Qaeda involvement. And the final ones just said, 'indications of extremists,'" King said. He quoted Petraeus as saying that officials did not realize the significance of the change at the time, "and that for an unclassified statement, this was acceptable." 'BLAME IT ON US' Petraeus, a retired Army four-star general, slipped in and out of the closed sessions unseen by a swarm of media. Capitol police cleared journalists and others from hallways where the former CIA director might have been spotted. "You can blame it on us," Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democratic chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told reporters who complained about not even seeing Petraeus. "The general was both eager and willing to give us his views on this, and his experience on it, and that's very much appreciated. ... We didn't want to make it any more difficult for him." Although he has left the CIA, Petraeus was asked to testify about Benghazi in part because he had gone to Libya before his resignation to interview people about what happened in Benghazi on September 11. Lawmakers appeared to treat the question of Petraeus' personal life with kid gloves. They said the questioning was sometimes awkward against the backdrop of the Broadwell scandal and because some of them have known Petraeus for years and think highly of his military service in which he ran the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. "I consider him a friend, which made the questioning tough, to be honest with you," King told reporters. "I've known him for nine years now. I actually asked him to run for president a few years ago," he said. Democratic lawmakers emerging from the sessions with Petraeus said it was clear Rice had been speaking from the talking points that were approved by the U.S. intelligence community when she discussed the Benghazi attack. In five Sunday talk-show appearances on September 16, Rice said the assault was prompted by an anti-Muslim video and then developed into a more violent act. But she also told CBS's "Face the Nation" that day that it was "clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence." "I don't think she should be pilloried for this," said Feinstein, who was carrying a copy of the talking points that were probably given to Rice and read them aloud to journalists. "She did what I would have done, or anyone else would have done, that is going on a weekend show. You would have said, 'What talking points can I use?'" Feinstein said. "It's almost as if the intent is to assassinate the character." Senator Saxby Chambliss, the intelligence committee's top Republican, told reporters the problem with Rice's talk show appearances was that she did not stick with the talking points she was given on the Benghazi attack. "She knew at that point in time that al Qaeda was very likely responsible in part or in whole for the death of Ambassador Stevens," he said. Some senior Republicans have vowed to block Rice's potential nomination for secretary of state or another top Cabinet post because of her Benghazi comments. Rice is believed to be on Obama's short list to replace Hillary Clinton, who has said she intends to leave her State Department job. (Additional reporting by Patricia Zengerle and David Lawder; Editing by Will Dunham and Peter Cooney) Drones and Data Mining: Looking Forward After Petraeus, Looking Back After the ElectionBy Cory Bennett | National Journal – Sat, Nov 17, 2012Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, retired Gen. David Petraeus, testifies before a joint intelligence committee hearing on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, Sept. 13, 2011. The Political Landscape is a weekly conversation with National Journal writers, editors, and outside experts on the news of the day. On this week's show, drone strikes and data mining. How will drone strikes move forward with leadership changing in the CIA and Department of Defense? And for all the talk of data mining during the campaigns, did knowing that a potential voter shopped at Burlington Coat Factory actually help the campaigns come election day? We'll explore the future of U.S. drone strike policy with Atlantic writer Conor Friedersdorf, who been writing about the institutionalization of drone strikes in the U.S. On Wednesday this week, Israeli officials announced that their forces had targeted and killed Ahmed al-Jabari, the military chief of Hamas, with an unmanned targeted drone strike. As Michael Hirsh wrote in National Journal, "It has begun. The Obama administration's permanent embrace of 'targeted killings' ... is setting a precedent for other nations." Indeed, the number of U.S. drone strikes can be staggering. This year alone, the U.S. military has launched 333 drones in Afghanistan. That monthly average of 33 drone strikes is up from 24.5 just last year. Even more concerning to Friedersdorf is the 110 drone strikes the CIA launched under the 14 months of former CIA Director David Petraeus's leadership. In part 2, we'll discuss data mining with New York Times writer Charles Duhigg. Duhigg is the author of the book, "The Power of Habit," which revealed how Target, based on tracking customer's shopping habits, figured out that a teen girl was pregnant before her father did. Duhigg will explain what the Obama campaign did with the information gathered by 76 tracking cookies it had on barackobama.com in September, more than Best Buy had in a same period. We'll also talk to Professor Lisa Garcia Bedolla, who co-authored the book "Mobilizing Inclusion," which summarizes years of research on what makes for effective get-out-the-vote campaigns. She'll explain why providing voters with information about the candidates and issues may have little impact on voter turnout. Wolf Blitzer Stalks Tampa Socialite Jill Kelly On SNL Published on Nov 17, 2012 by cleanituppeople "SNL" took several different swipes at the Petraeus scandal on Saturday's Jeremy Renner-helmed episode, including spoofing Paula Broadstone in the cold open, and Seth Meyer's winners and losers segment on Weekend Update. the Real Story is the FBI agent that investigated this, doesn't care at all about the Affair. he does care that the woman had Classified Intel that she wasn't suppose to have.. the FBI bust another Israeli Spy ring...the Media just wants to waste peoples time with sex distractions. Porn is free people get your twisted fill and demand the Media focus on Issues of Importance. Like Our Generals being Held Up ,Demoted, Reisigning, while Israel spys,lies,threatens,and KILLS. our people. wtf people. 'SNL' skewers Petraeus scandal (VIDEO) Senior Media Reporter The Lookout – Nov. 18th 2012.... 2 hrs 57 mins ago "Saturday Night Live" did not shy away from the sex scandal that's rocked the Central Intelligence Agency, dedicating two full sketches and plenty of jokes on this week's episode to the Petraeus affair. On the show's cold-opening, Paula Broadwell--played by newcomer Cecily Strong--read from her now infamous book on disgraced former CIA director Gen. David Petraeus, "All In," at Washington, D.C. bookstore Politics and Prose. The book reading soon turned awkward for the rapidly shrinking audience, with Broadwell's book sounding more like "Fifty Shades of Grey" than a military biography. "Like most people," Broadwell said, "my feelings about erotic asphyxiation have been somewhat complicated." "We'll be leaving this program now, since it's becoming uncomfortable," a C-SPAN host announced. Later in the show, Jason Sudeikis--who spent the 2012 presidential campaign impersonating Mitt Romney--did a serviceable Wolf Blitzer for a sketch mocking "The Situation Room" coverage of the Jill Kelley, the Tampa socialite and so-called "third woman" involved in the Petraeus plot. On "Weekend Update," the Petraeus affair provided even more joke fodder. "David Petraeus and his alleged mistress Paula Broadwell reportedly used a trick popular with terrorist by leaving untraceable messages for each other in the draft folder of a shared email account," Seth Meyers said. "And in another trick borrowed from terrorists, it blew up in their faces." "It was revealed that the shirtless photo an FBI agent sent to Jill Kelley was not intended to be flirtatious, but instead was a joke photo of the agent standing shirtless next to two target dummies," Meyers continued. "Ohh--that doesn't make it better." Meyers also used the ongoing scandal for "Weekend Update's" recurring "Winners/Losers" segment. "Winner: Whoever writes the next biography of David Petraeus," Meyers joked. "Loser: All other biographers. For the next 10 years if you tell someone you're writing a biography, expect them to say, 'Oh yeah, nice.'" "Winner: 'Homeland,'" he continued. "Just when your plot twists were starting to get a little far-fetched, this story shows up and makes you look like a documentary." House, Senate Committees Want to Know What Petraeus Knew about Benghazi Published on Nov 16, 2012 by Roberta Petterson One week after former CIA Director David Petraeus stepped down because of an extramarital affair, he headed back to Capitol Hill for intelligence briefings. As CNN's Emily Schmidt reports, the House and Senate Intelligence Committees want to know what he knew about the Benghazi attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and 3 other Americans. David Petraeus ended a week in the spotlight behind closed Congressional doors. The attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya has become a political issue over when the Obama Administration knew what prompted the attack: spontaneous reaction to an anti-Muslim video, or terrorists. Then-CIA Director Petraeus briefed lawmakers in September. Now, impressions of that meeting are mixed. Congressman King said Petraeus testified he had no direct involvement in developing the talking points used by Susan Rice. In early days after the attack, the U.S. Ambassador to the UN pointed to the film as a potential cause. Lawmakers say Petraeus was asked little about his admitted affair with Biographer Paula Broadwell. Petraeus reportedly was not under oath while testifying, a nod to the job he held, before it was lost in a scandal. Businessman: Jill Kelley Asked for $80M, Bragged of Petraeus Connection Published on Nov 16, 2012 by Afrika prince Businessman: Jill Kelley Asked for $80M, Bragged of Petraeus Connection general david petraeus senate armed services committee 08 april 2008 part 1 Published on Oct 23, 2012 by wesawthat general david petraeus and ambassador ryan crocker before the iraq senate armed services committee 08 april 2008 - part 1 general david petraeus senate armed services committee 08 april 2008 part 2 Published on Oct 23, 2012 by wesawthat general david petraeus and ambassador ryan crocker before the iraq senate armed services committee 08 april 2008 - part 2 part 1: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8781669226024534229&hl=en part3: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5990341753196783462&hl=en general david petraeus senate armed services committee 08 april 2008 part 3 Published on Oct 23, 2012 by wesawthat general david petraeus and ambassador ryan crocker before the iraq senate armed services committee 08 april 2008 - part 3 One secret reason Petraeus had to resignBy The Week's Editorial Staff | The Week – Thu, Nov 15, 2012He was in the nuclear chain of command When he admitted having an extramarital affair with Paula Broadwell, CIA Director David Petraeus, as a senior civilian in the presidential chain of command should something go catastrophically wrong in Washington, violated special behavior codes for officials who might one day be forced to execute nuclear strikes. In classified presidential emergency action documents, the CIA director is among the dozens, if not hundreds of officials who are listed as National Command Authority successors in the event that higher ranking officials are no longer able to do their jobs. Because under certain circumstances he'd have ready access to the nuclear satchel, Petraeus was indoctrinated into the Personnel Reliability Program, which evaluates and monitors the lifestyle and behavior of Americans with access to nuclear command and control mechanisms. Adultery is not a minor sin under the PRP rules. The details of so-called "nuclear pre-delegation" is one of the most tightly held secrets in the U.S. Government. The first 18 presidential successors are spelled out by law. But it is not clear whether the pre-delegation lists follow the Constitutional chain of command. After retiring as a general, Petraeus was confirmed by the Senate as a civilian, and was probably given emergency action training by the White House Military Office, which runs the Continuity of Government program. In that role, he could serve as one of the two people needed to confirm codes that would key Permissive Action Links (PALs) and activate launch sequences, adhering to the U.S. Strategic Command's two-person rule for nuclear weapons. Precisely what would need to happen for an official like Petraeus to be in the catbird seat is classified, the result of decades of highly secret rules and provisions that are kept locked in safes. And so seriously does the U.S. government take the PRP that if a missile wing commander is scheduled to get a wisdom tooth extraction, he or she must notify the squadron's PRP officer, who will transfer power to the deputy commander until the commander's doctor certifies in writing that he or she is able to function normally again.
When Petraeus conceded having an affair to DNI James Clapper, Clapper had several reasons to insist on his resignation, one of which was the director's exalted position in COG programs. Another was simply that the CIA director is held to a higher standard of trust and rectitude by foreign officials, who might take strategic advantage of his public embarrassment. The current nuclear war plan for the United States is numbered "OPLAN 8010-08" and entitled "Strategic Deference and Global Strike." In Benghazi testimony, Petraeus says al Qaeda role known earlyBy Susan Cornwell and Tabassum Zakaria | Reuters – 32 mins ago November 16th 2012  Associated Press/Cliff Owen, File - FILE - In this June 23, 2011 file photo, then-CIA Director-desigate Gen. David Petraeus testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington. An anonymous email sent in May set off an WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Former CIA Director David Petraeus told Congress on Friday that he and the spy agency had sought to make clear from the outset that September's deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, involved an al Qaeda affiliate, lawmakers said. Petraeus told lawmakers "there were extremists in the group" that launched the attack on the diplomatic mission, describing them as affiliates of al Qaeda and other groups, said Representative C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives intelligence committee. "The fact is that he clarified it," Ruppersberger said. Petraeus appeared behind closed doors before the House and Senate intelligence panels the week after quitting his CIA post because of an extramarital affair. He made no public remarks. Another lawmaker, Republican Representative Peter King, said Petraeus' account in the closed-door session differed from the assessment the CIA chief gave to Congress two months ago, just days after the September 11 attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. "He also stated that he thought all along he made it clear that there were significant terrorist involvement, and that is not my recollection of what he told us on September 14," King said. Petraeus last week admitted to an affair with his biographer, Paula Broadwell. Lawmakers said a somber Petraeus told them his resignation had nothing to do with issues related to Benghazi or any reluctance to testify before Congress. "The general did not address any specifics of the affair, of that issue," Democratic Representative Jim Langevin said. "What he did say in his opening statement was that he regrets the circumstances that led to his resignation." The assault on the U.S. mission and nearby CIA annex in Benghazi has turned into a flash point between President Barack Obama, a Democrat, and Republicans. Republicans accuse the White House and in particular the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, of misleading the public just after the attack by suggesting the assault was a spontaneous act instead of a planned terrorist operation. The Obama administration denies misleading anyone and says it discussed information about the Benghazi tragedy as it came in. Some Republicans have suggested the administration initially wanted to avoid the idea that it had failed to prevent a terrorist attack, which might have dampened the president's re-election chances on November 6. Obama has denied that implication. Petraeus, a retired Army four-star general, slipped in and out of the closed sessions unseen by a swarm of media. Capitol police cleared journalists and others from hallways where the former CIA director might have been spotted. 'BLAME IT ON US' "You can blame it on us," Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democratic chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee, told reporters who complained about not even seeing Petraeus. "The general was both eager and willing to give us his views on this, and his experience on it, and that's very much appreciated. ... We didn't want to make it any more difficult for him." Although he has left the CIA, Petraeus was asked to testify about Benghazi in part because he had gone to Libya before his resignation to interview people about what happened in Benghazi on September 11. Lawmakers appeared to treat the question of Petraeus' personal life with kid gloves. They said the questioning was sometimes awkward against the backdrop of the Broadwell scandal and because some of them have known Petraeus for years and think highly of his military service in which he ran the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. "I consider him a friend, which made the questioning tough, to be honest with you," King told reporters. "I've known him for nine years now. I actually asked him to run for president a few years ago," he said. Petraeus' affair has raised questions about whether any classified information was divulged to Broadwell that would affect national security. So far, FBI investigators have not discovered anything to suggest that was the case, law enforcement sources said. Democratic lawmakers emerging from the sessions with Petraeus said it was clear Rice had been speaking from talking points that were approved by the U.S. intelligence community when she discussed the Benghazi attack. In five Sunday talk show appearances on September 16, Rice said the assault was prompted by an anti-Muslim video and then morphed into a more violent act. But she also told CBS's "Face the Nation" that day that it was "clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence." "I don't think she should be pilloried for this," said Feinstein, who was carrying a copy of the talking points that were probably given to Rice and read them aloud to journalists. "She did what I would have done, or anyone else would have done, that is going on a weekend show. You would have said, 'What talking points can I use?'" Feinstein said. "It's almost as if the intent is to assassinate the character." Senator Saxby Chambliss, the intelligence committee's top Republican, told reporters the problem with Rice's talk show appearances was that she did not stick with the talking points she was given on the Benghazi attack. "She knew at that point in time that al Qaeda was very likely responsible in part or in whole for the death of Ambassador Stevens," he said. Some senior Republicans have vowed to block Rice's potential nomination for secretary of state or another top Cabinet post because of her Benghazi comments. Rice is believed to be on Obama's short list to replace Hillary Clinton, who has said she intends to leave her State Department job. (Additional reporting by Patricia Zengerle and David Lawder; Editing by Will Dunham) Petraeus tells Congress he believed terrorists behind Libya attack, doesn't discuss affairBy | Associated Press – 6 hrs agoWASHINGTON - A congressman says former CIA Director David Petraeus is telling lawmakers he believed all along that the deadly Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya was a terrorist attack. Petraeus was testifying Friday behind closed doors for the congressional intelligence committees. It's his first Capitol Hill appearance since resigning a week ago over an extramarital affair. Republican Rep. Peter King tells reporters after the House hearing that Petraeus focused his remarks on Libya. Lawmakers say Petraeus told them that CIA talking points written after the attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans referred to it as a terrorist attack. But Petraeus says that reference was removed by other federal agencies that made changes to the CIA's draft. The attack killed the U.S. ambassador. What's behind the GOP's war on Susan Rice?12:15 pm on 11/16/2012  Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the U.N. speaks on "Face the Nation" Sept. 16, 2012. (Photo by Chris Usher/AP Photo/CBS News) Since President Obama was re-elected last week, Republicans have at least hinted at a renewed willingness to work with him on issues ranging from immigration to taxes. But on at least one unexpected subject, the GOP's all-out opposition to the president endures: Susan Rice. Senate Republicans, led by John McCain and Lindsey Graham, have been unusually blunt in saying they won't confirm Rice, the current U.S. ambassador to the U.N., if she's nominated to serve as Secretary of State, as Obama reportedly intends. "I will do everything in my power to block her from becoming Secretary of State," McCain declared Wednesday. Though Rice has served on the National Security Council, as a special adviser to President Clinton, as a State Department official, and as a foreign-policy adviser to at least three presidential campaigns, McCain recently called her "unqualified." Graham said she's "disconnected to reality," and doesn't "deserve" promotion. In an op-ed on FoxNews.com, Richard Grenell, a Republican foreign-policy hand who served briefly as an adviser to Mitt Romney's campaign, slammed Rice's "miserable" record at the U.N. The pile-on has drawn a brush-back from Obama. "If Senator McCain and Senator Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me," he declared Wednesday. So what's behind the vehement anti-Rice campaign? Of course, for the GOP, the attacks serve as a way to continue to embarrass the Obama administration over its response to the Benghazi attacks. It was Rice who at first blamed the attacks on an anti-Muslim film—an explanation that now appears incomplete. Still, it isn't all about Benghazi. For one thing, Rice makes an easy target. "Unlike Secretary Clinton, she doesn't have a huge national following, and unlike Secretary [of Defense Leon] Panetta, she doesn't have a huge network of contacts on Capitol Hill," suggests Heather Hurlburt, the executive director of the National Security Network and a former State Department official in the Clinton administration. In other words, Rice may simply be low-hanging Obama administration fruit for the opposing party. But the campaign against Rice also is allowing Republicans to continue making the case—as they've done almost since Obama took office—that the administration avoids taking a hard line with our adversaries and doesn't do enough to support our friends. Grenell wrote that Rice "ignored Syria's growing problems for months," and "skipped sessions when Israel needed defending." On Iran, he charged, Rice has been able to pass just one resolution, compared to the Bush administration's five. Rice's defenders say this portrait of a pushover is out of line with reality. They note that she was among the administration officials to push Obama to intervene in Libya, and has had some heated exchanges with the Russian ambassador. One U.N. Security Council ambassador reportedly called her "the bulldozer" and "the headmistress," and another terms her "bossy." As for not passing enough Iran resolutions: "It's strange that conservatives always say that the UN is feckless, but want more condemnations of Iran from the organization, which have little effect," said John Norris, a Center for American Progress director who has advised the UN. Some observers even suggest that Rice's race and gender may be a subtle factor in the opposition. Grenell wrote that when President Obama defended Rice this week, he "looked like a big brother defending his little sister on the playground." And it's hard to imagine a white man with a similarly lengthy foreign policy resume being described as "unqualified." "I don't think in this day and age a lot of people wake up saying they want to go after a black woman, but there is absolutely a subconscious role that race and gender play," said Hurlburt. As with Obama, some Republicans still see some people occupying high government positions as 'less legitimate' than others, because of their color and sex, she added. MANGST98 commented yesterday When Republican nominee Romney prematurely denounced Mr. Obama for unspecified failures regarding Benghazi, Ayotte, Graham, McCain and others chose to support the leader of a Republican party which was STILL actively trying to disenfranchise Americans, rather than represent their constituents. Ayotte, Graham and McCain now feel they have nothing more to lose and are cutting off the limb rather than climbing back down. Pitiful. Of course, from the perspective of their party, any noise and confusion they can mange will, they hope, keep people from looking at the old man behind the curtain. The wealthy old man. The wealthy old white guy. The wealthy old white guy who can't seem to grasp the basic good sense of providing adequate food, shelter, healthcare and training for your livestock. dlkar replied yesterday As someone once remarked, "the R stands for rich and racist.
TRFjr commented yesterday
"King also said that the testimony from Petraeus today was much different than his original testimony on Sept. 14. Today, Petraeus told the committee that he knew "almost immediately" that the attack was the work of an al-Qaeda affiliated militia called Ansar al Sharia and that the "overwhelming amount of evidence said this was a terror attack." According to numerous reports, in his original testimony, Petraeus focused almost exclusively on the YouTube video as the prime motivator for the attack." It is pretty clear why Petraeus testimony changed from the original one back on sept 14. his affair wasn't made public and was being held over his head so he would give a favorable testimony for Obama. Now that the affair has been made public and he is no longer under Obamas thumb he can be truthful
Sweet Equity commented yesterday
This is just the beginning...sooner or later the R's will try to impeach Obama. To them it's all a game. One presumes Nero was a early Republican.
Greg-479481 commented yesterday
The Repubs are attacking Rice because they want to have Sen Kerry appointed to state so he will resign his MA Sen Seat. Then XSEN Brown can try to gain it in a special election in MA. They will probably offer Obama a deal which would consist of an easy confirmation for Kerry and would walk back all this trash about Rice.
JJardine replied yesterday
In reply to: Greg-479481 #4 I totally agree with you...the R's are looking ahead and trying to manipulate who ends up with what appointments. But, I would add that we play into their hands when we ask people like Ambassador Rice to make statements to the press on any incident where an investigation is under way...it is too easy to parse out her words and critique her meaning (or anyone elses) after the fact. "No comment until our investigation is completed" should serve. O'Donnell: Petraeus's real failing was 'reckless judgements'12:12 am on 11/17/2012 In Friday's Rewrite segment, MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell addressed misconceptions over the David Petraeus and Paula Broadwell affair. The issue isn't power or sex, O'Donnell said: it's about judgement. He used the much-analyzed Clinton marriage to shape his argument. "I think the Clinton marriage works. It works for them. And it does not include sexual exclusivity," The Last Word host declared. Using the Clintons' marriage or their understanding of the marriage as an example, O'Donnell delineated the dichotomy between marital fidelity and sexual exclusivity. "Bill and Hillary Clinton are both smart enough and loyal enough to each other and love each other enough to realize that that sexual exclusivity deviation from the norm – which, by the way, actually is the norm in the real world – was never going to be a big enough problem to end their marriage, because they don't define marital fidelity as simply sexual exclusivity." He added, "the Clintons obviously judge marital fidelity to be something much bigger than that. And their judgement has been proven right, about their marriage, anyway." O'Donnell argued the lesson from the Petraeus scandal revolves around exhibiting good judgment, especially as a four-star general and CIA director when those roles rely so heavily on it. "The 1950s spy novel notion that extra-marital sex somehow could make Petraeus subject to blackmail is utterly childish," said O'Donnell. "His terrible judgment is not about the sex – it's about the emails about the sex. General Petraeus engaged in risky behavior involving his email, and he did it with a person who engaged in even more risky behavior with her email." Broadwell allegedly sent threatening messages to a Tampa socialite, Jill Kelley, about General Petraeus, which led to the unraveling of the series of terrible judgments made by Petraeus. Petraeus's second slip-up was to reportedly befriend military "groupies." Admittedly, Petraeus is not the first high-ranking general or CIA director to have an affair, but O'Donnell concluded that "a four-star general and CIA director who had the profoundly bad judgment to engage in the kind of affair that got wildly out of control and left hard-drives full of proof of the affair." And that this scandal should be a useful window into Petraeus's judgement, or "a series of very reckless judgements."
Businessman: Jill Kelley Asked for $80M, Bragged of Petraeus ConnectionBy BRIAN ROSS | ABC News – Thu, Nov 15, 2012
Related ContentA New York businessman who discussed a multi-billion-dollar Korean business deal with Jill Kelley said the Tampa woman at the center of the Petraeus scandal told him Gen. Petraeus had arranged for her to become an honorary consul for South Korea and promote free trade, and then asked him for $80 million to complete the deal. "Ms. Kelley made it clear to me that General Petraeus put her in this position, and that's why she was able to have access to such senior levels [of the Korean government]," said Adam Victor, president and CEO of TransGas Development Systems, "that they were essentially doing a favor for General Petraeus, and that she had access solely because of her relationship with General Petraeus." Victor, who met Kelley at the Republican National Convention in Tampa in August, said he was disappointed in Gen. Petraeus for helping Kelley become an honorary consul. "Frankly, I blame Gen. Petraeus for this as a lapse of judgment," he said. "The general should have known better." Gen. Petraeus resigned as CIA director last Friday after an FBI investigation turned up evidence of an affair between Petraeus and Paula Broadwell, co-author of the Petraeus biography "All In." The investigation began when Kelley, a Tampa socialite, told an FBI agent she knew about "harassing" emails that turned out to originate from Broadwell. According to Victor, he went to Tampa to promote coal gasification and met a friend of Kelley's who suggested that they meet to discuss a possible international deal. "The person who introduced me to her said that she was well known to be a very close friend of Gen. Petraeus," said Victor. Victor said that he and Kelley met in "the VIP section" at the convention, where Kelly said that "she was a very good friend of Gen. Petraeus," and that "he arranged for her to get this position of honorary consul for South Korea" to promote free trade. She also allegedly said she had access to senior government officials in Korea. Victor said he thought it made sense that Petraeus would want to put a trusted aide in charge of promoting free trade. When Kelley named her fee for brokering the deal, however, Victor balked. The coal gasification plants under discussion were worth $4 billion, said Victor -- and Kelley wanted a two percent cut. "That's an $80 million fee," he said. "And I mean that is problematic . . . No broker gets $80 million. I mean that's two whole orders of magnitude higher than what they would get." Victor said he "terminated the relationship" after Kelley asked for $80 million. He decided that while she was not making an inappropriate request on purpose, it showed she was inexperienced and unqualified for the job. He also began to wonder about Petraeus's judgment. "It became clear that it did not smell right," he said. "Gen. Petraeus should not have put an inexperienced person in charge of the Free Trade Agreement with such an important ally as South Korea." "It's a sad day for the country," concluded Victor. "Gen. Petraeus has served this country well." A spokesperson for Jill Kelley did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Retired Army Col. Steve Boylan, a friend and former spokesperson for ex-CIA Director Petraeus, said it was "nonsense" that Petraeus had any part in Kelley's alleged Korean deal. "He knows nothing about it," insisted Boylan. "What other people do he can't control." Another source told ABC News that Petraeus had asked Kelley to stop throwing his name around. If secession could only be achieved by force of arms or a court decision, the "Peaceful Secession" movement would be futile. But "secession" need not involve brick and mortar barriers. The spirit of secession can be far more effective in dealing with a federal government gone rogue – it can stop it cold. But as was the case in 1776, it seems that some who would be expected to come to the "Peaceful Secession" cause have not. Some self –identified conservatives actually seem to believe the only reason to sign a secession petition is because you REALLY believe doing so will bring about a new separate nation in North America. This is the narrowest view of the possibilities involved. A successful physical secession, however unlikely, is only one reason for signing a petition demanding your state be allowed to "peacefully secede" from the United States. Aside from this, these petitions assure like- minded people they are not alone, which is a vital ingredient in any conservative movement. It promotes the strength in numbers we need to help ourselves. Moreover, it sends a clear message of support to our Republican Representatives in Washington and our state capitals who must carry our message forward. Petitions like these are a sure measure of voter sentiment, and politicians know how to read. Those who would mock this idea as unattainable are forgetting our nation's history. In 1776, fifty five brave men in a nation of 2.5 million American colonists challenged England to a fight to the death. Even knowing England had the largest military in the world and a reputation for cruelty did not deter them from stepping forward. Can anyone deny that the original Tea Party patriots who dumped English tea into Boston harbor provided encouragement to the signers of our Declaration of Independence? Does anyone think complete silence in fear of being mocked while our rights and way of life are being destroyed by Barack Obama is the spirit of our Founding fathers, or that such silence will help us escape his clutches? Whether anyone in or out of the conservative movement is unhappy or rejoices over its existence, the "Peaceful Secession" movement will continue until it either fades out or gets our state level officials fired up. If we don't do this now, why should our elected representatives stick out their neck to help us? If the only downside to this movement is giving David Letterman gag lines at our expense, what have we lost? Besides, he and the Left hate us anyway and will never "like" us until we are dead. Where is the downside to this? Photo credit: Roger Smith (Creative Commons) Conservative group launches robocall campaign to impeach ObamaBy ANI | ANI – 19 hrs agoWashington, Nov. 15 (ANI): A conservative group in the US has launched a movement to impeach President Barack Obama, just days after he won a second term in the White House. The Conservative Majority Fund, the group known primarily for its birther conspiracy spreading, has launched a robocall campaign to gain support for Obama's impeachment. "Our only recourse now is to move forward with the full impeachment of President Obama. We suspect that Obama is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and that there may be grounds for impeachment as is laid out in the constitution," the call, emailed to The Huffington Post by Shaun Dakin of StopPoliticalCalls.org, read. "Further, he may not even be a U.S. citizen because nobody, I mean no one, has seen an actual physical copy of his birth certificate. Impeachment is our only option. And Republicans are already considering Obama investigations. As the nation's most effective conservative group we are launching the official impeach Obama campaign," it added. According to the report, among the 'misdemeanors' they have cited are the president's proposals to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, an idea supported by Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), and to give 'full amnesty' to undocumented immigrants. The group is casting a wide net with the calls. People in Washington, Colorado, New Jersey and Virginia have so far reported receiving the call. (ANI) Video: Petraeus Love Triangle Part Of Benghazi Cover-upNovember 15, 2012 By Comments (13) We know David Petraeus heroically served this country for four decades. We know his alleged mistress Paula Broadwell graduated with honors at West Point and was an exemplary officer, going on to military and later academic excellence. The only person we know little about is the "other woman"—Jill Kelley—the woman who supposedly received threatening emails from Broadwell. Who brought the whole sordid Petraeus/Broadwell affair down in a crash. Would it surprise you to know she may not be an American citizen? Would it surprise you to know she arrived in the United States in the 1970s from Lebanon? Would it surprise you to know she is in debt to the tune of $4 million dollars from giving lavish parties at her mansion for top military brass? Would it surprise you to know her twin sister is in bed with the Democrat party and is also deeply in debt? How convenient, when we find out Broadwell was singing like a bird about what really happened in Benghazi. How convenient when Petraeus was about to spill the beans to Congress—under oath this time. Then the American people would have found out that Nobel Laureate Barack Obama had a secret CIA prison in Benghazi that was probably torturing apprehended terrorists. That Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty had indeed called for help and requested specifically Delta Force, and Barack Hussein Obama told them to "stand down." So Petraeus and Broadwell had to be stopped. By any means necessary. Can you say "treason," America? Resolved, that Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate: Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors. Article I In his conduct while President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has: Unlawfully exercised the authority of his office to take private property for public use in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which guarantees to the People that "private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation," and without "due process of law"; Unlawfully interfered with the management of private companies for the purpose of achieving government control of them, in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Unlawfully interfered with the economic rights of the People by imposing unreasonable impairments in the fulfillment of their intended contractual obligations, and their ability to enter into such contracts, and attempting to change our fundamental economic system, where there is no significant or legitimate public purpose to do so. In doing this, Barack Hussein Obama has undermined the integrity of his office, has brought disrepute on the Presidency, has betrayed his trust as President, and has acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, Barack Hussein Obama, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States. Article II In his conduct while President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration of justice, and to that end, through his subordinates and agents, has: unlawfully engaged in a conspiracy to suppress evidence of the true place of his birth. This obstruction of justice has resulted in a violation of the Constitutional provision that a President of the United States must be a natural born citizen. Unlawfully refused his assent to the Laws of the United States, and exercised false powers of veto that are contrary to Constitution. In all of this, Barack Hussein Obama has undermined the integrity of his office, has brought disrepute on the Presidency, has betrayed his trust as President, and has acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, Barack Hussein Obama, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States. I agree with the Articles of Impeachment and want to add my support to the growing nationwide movement to Impeach Barack Hussein Obama. To add your name to the Impeach Obama Campaign petition, fill out the form below and click the button when done. McCain Misses Classified Briefing While Blasting White HouseBy Jonathan Karl | ABC OTUS News – 5 hrs ago
Senator John McCain is demanding answers on the Benghazi attack, but his office tells ABC News he missed a classified briefing on the subject because of a "scheduling error." The classified briefing was held on Wednesday before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee - of which Senator McCain is a member - and lasted three hours. It featured testimony by officials from the State Department, the Pentagon, the CIA and the National Counterterrorism Center. During part of the briefing, McCain was holding a press conference demanding answers about the administration's handling of the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya on Step. 11 that killed four Americans, including US Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens. McCain called on Congress to launch Watergate-style hearings to get to the bottom of what happened. "More than two months after the Benghazi attack, there are still many unanswered questions," McCain told reporters in the Capitol Hill press conference. "While we await the findings and recommendations of the administration's internal review of the Benghazi attack, it's essential for the Congress to conduct its own independent assessment." At precisely the same time McCain was holding that press conference, the briefing for the Homeland Security Committee was happening in another part of the Capitol building. Why did he missing the briefing on a subject he has been so adamant in demanding answers on? McCain's office says his absence was unintentional - an oversight. "Senator McCain was absent from the hearing due to a scheduling error," McCain spokesman Brian Rogers told ABC News. Even if he had attended, McCain was unlikely to be satisfied with what he heard. After the briefing was over, the top Republican on the Homeland Security Committee, Senator Susan Collins, was asked if she was satisfied with the hearing. "I really wasn't," Collins answered. "There are many, many unanswered questions. I feel that we've only scratched the surface through the briefings that we had today." There are currently at least four Senate Committees looking into the Benghazi attack. For her part, Sen. Collins does not agree with McCain's call to combine those into one special - or "select" - committee like the one that investigated Watergate. " I do not see the benefit of, nor the need for a select committee," Collins said. "Our committee, our Homeland Security Committee has government-wide jurisdiction and a history of producing comprehensive bipartisan reports on everything from the Ft. Hood terrorist attack to Hurricane Katrina, so I don't see the need for creating a brand new select committee to take a look at this." The White House had no immediate comment on McCain's absence from the hearing, but one former White House official was quick to jump on it. "It is nothing short of appalling that Senator McCain would use his time and influence to play politics instead of getting answers to the questions he claims to have," said Bill Burton of the pro-Obama group Priorities USA. -Jonathan Karl and Sunlen Miller One pundit remarked that if all fifty states secede, there would be nothing to secede from. So it becomes sort of a funny concept. But Barack Obama is no laughing matter. America is sick of going to the vomitorium each morning after learning of some new Obama abomination. We were busy being sick during the past presidential election, learning of the massive voter fraud, sabotaged voting machines, or the fact that Obama mailed out absentee ballots to our troops overseas too late to make a difference or "lost" them. They even had the gall to tell us a plane "crashed and burned" that contained absentee ballots en route to our troops in Afghanistan. (Any details of the crash mysteriously went down the memory hole). But that is only half of Obama's contempt for the rule of law, contempt for the Constitution. His "we can't wait for Congress to act" attitude translates into blatantly spurning Congress and making law by executive order, most recently his pseudo-Dream act, conferring amnesty on hundreds of thousands of illegals. Or his illegal Libyan war, where Defense Secretary Leon Panetta went before Congress and said Obama didn't need Congress' approval to topple Gaddafi—he only needed the UN's approval. But probably the most onerous aspect of the Obama presidency is his seeking to nullify the Second Amendment via a UN "gun treaty." Secessionist and just regular American citizens are buying guns in droves in anticipation that Obama and his blue-helmeted "peacekeepers" will determine that the right to bear arms no longer applies in the United States. Will the secessionist movement, which now numbers in the hundreds of thousands and is fast approaching a million, lead to anything? Will it in fact lead to the impeachment of the abomination known as Barack Hussein Obama? Time will tell. Atheist groups have long advertised their agenda in an apparent attempt to recruit more people into a life devoid of purpose greater than this human existence. These activists have every right to spend their money on billboards or any other outreach project they deem appropriate; but believers can — and, in my opinion, should — speak out against the more distasteful campaigns. One such plan, a website backed by the American Humanist Association, speaks directly to the next generation with arguments designed to cause them to question their faith. The site, Kids Without God, is designed to teach kids "there's another way to learn about morals and values," said a spokesperson for AHA. "It doesn't need to come from traditional religion." Advertising for the site will come in several forms, including $30,000 earmarked for bus advertising in and around the nation's capital. Several popular websites are also running ads, though Disney and National Geographic Kids thankfully refused based on content. AHA hopes to attract children whose parents are "traditionally religious" as well as those "from families like that of President Barack Obama, whose mother was a secular humanist," the spokesperson explained. With tag lines such as "I'm getting a bit old for imaginary friends," he said the site will address kids who have "already made up their minds to reject supernatural explanations" as well as those who "are just questioning." A press release indicates what children can find on the site, including topics such as sexuality and discrimination. Bill Nye the Science Guy's defense of evolution is included as one of the featured videos. The perceived need for an anti-God website for kids arises from the fact that there are a "plethora of websites geared toward teaching kids about Christianity, Judaism, or Islam," the spokesperson explained, contending that "its time to make available an online resource that's built just for kids without God." I've never been quite clear about why atheists feel the need to proselytize. Believers in a higher power try to convert others because we trust in an eternal hope and life after this one. Atheists think our worldly body represents the extent of existence and seem desperate to add numbers to their ranks. When they bypass adults and directly target children, though, they are using an age-old leftist tactic of indoctrination that makes an end run around parental influence. B. Christopher Agee founded The Informed Conservative in 2011. Like his Facebook page for engaging, relevant conservative content daily. |
Karibu Jukwaa la www.mwanabidii.com
Pata nafasi mpya za Kazi www.kazibongo.blogspot.com
Blogu ya Habari na Picha www.patahabari.blogspot.com
Kujiondoa Tuma Email kwenda
wanabidii+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com Utapata Email ya kudhibitisha ukishatuma
Disclaimer:
Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.
0 comments:
Post a Comment