News/Politics 5-6-13

What’s interesting in the news today?

Open Thread.

We’ve had a bunch of new stuff released on Benghazi over the weekend.

From the get go. From CBS

“Everybody in the mission” in Benghazi, Libya, thought the attack on a U.S. consulate there last Sept. 11 was an act of terror “from the get-go,” according to excerpts of an interview investigators conducted with the No. 2 official in Libya at the time, obtained by CBS News’ “Face the Nation.”

“I think everybody in the mission thought it was a terrorist attack from the beginning,” Greg Hicks, a 22-year foreign service diplomat who was the highest-ranking U.S. official in Libya after the strike, told investigators under authority of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Hicks, the former U.S. Embassy Tripoli deputy chief of mission, was not in Benghazi at the time of the attack, which killed Chris Stevens – then the U.S. ambassador to Libya – and three other Americans.”

Here’s the video of an Issa interview on “Face the Nation”. Looks like Bob Schieffer is coming around now that he knows they lied to him on his show.

 The Benghazi Talking Points, and how they were changed to obscure the truth, is addressed nicely at TheWeeklyStandard

“Even as the White House strove last week to move beyond questions about the Benghazi attacks of Tuesday, September 11, 2012, fresh evidence emerged that senior Obama administration officials knowingly misled the country about what had happened in the days following the assaults. The Weekly Standard has obtained a timeline briefed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence detailing the heavy substantive revisions made to the CIA’s talking points, just six weeks before the 2012 presidential election, and additional information about why the changes were made and by whom.”

The Whistleblowers have been named. From FoxNews

More info in this video from Fox News Sunday.

____________________________________________________

Israel has made strikes in Syria. From Bloomberg

“Syria accused Israel of attacking targets on the outskirts of Damascus in an aerial strike that sent a fireball over the capital and drew threats of retaliation.”

“Syria’s Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal al-Mekdad told CNN the airstrikes were a “declaration of war” and that the government would retaliate in its own time. The country’s information minister, Omran al-Zoubi, said in a statement on state TV that the attack opens doors to all possibilities and that Syria would use “any means” to protect its people.”

We also have a new report that says it was the rebels, and not the regime, that used chemical weapons in Syria. A possible false flag to get outsider(US) weapons and aid for the rebels. From TheHill

“United Nations human rights investigators said Sunday they have gathered  testimony from outside Syria suggesting rebels, not Bashar Assad’s regime, may  have used chemical weapons.

“Our investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims,  doctors and field hospitals and, according to their report of last week which I  have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible  proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated,” Carla Del  Ponte, a member of the independent commission of inquiry on Syria, told  Swiss-Italian television. “This was use on the part of the opposition, the  rebels, not by the government authorities.”

The allegations will likely make it harder for the Obama administration to  justify taking a more active role in the two-year-old civil war on the side of  the opposition. The administration has said in recent days that chemical weapons  appeared to have been used in Syria, which would violate the “red line” Obama  set for Assad’s forces.”

John McCain will be hardest hit by this news. He so wanted to help arm the rebels.

____________________________________________________

The Editor of the Aurora Sentinel has called for cracking down on the real terrorists and kidnappers among us. Those dastardly NRA members. He wants to strip them of their rights and send them to Gitmo. If you suggested doing that to an actual terrorist, he’d flip his liberal lid. No word on if they will be waterboarded or not.

And they wonder why newspapers are dying. 🙄 Maybe it has something to do with constantly insulting half your readers. Just sayin’… From TheAuroraSentinel

“I have seen the light. After all these years, I now agree that it’s fruitless to give the benefit of the doubt to people who are so obviously corrupt, so clearly malevolent, so bent on hurting innocent people for their own sick gain.

No more due process in the clear-cut case of insidious terrorism. When the facts are so clearly before all Americans, for the whole world to see, why bother with this country’s odious and cumbersome system of justice? Send the guilty monsters directly to Guantanamo Bay for all eternity and let them rot in their own mental squalor.

No, no, no. Not the wannabe sick kid who blew up the Boston marathon or the freak that’s mailing ricin-laced letters to the president. I’m talking about the real terrorist threat here in America: the National Rifle Association.”

“Hundreds of editorials across the country used the same language, making it clear that the NRA had bullied a handful of low-life senators who are so cowardly, so corrupt that they would knowingly lie and distort the issue in a painfully obvious attempt to cover their political tracts and back ends. This, this is on par with Nixon’s nastiness. This is unforgiveable.”

Of course they used the same language, they all used the same White House talking points. What they made clear was that they’re all reading the same script. The JournoList is obviously alive and well.

____________________________________________________

More evidence showing that Gosnell was not an exception, and that Pennsylvania isn’t the only state with a problem. From HotAir

“Besides the actions of the defendants in the Kermit Gosnell house-of-horrors abortion clinic in Philadelphia, the original grand jury expressed outrage in their 2011 report over the lack of intervention by the city and state of Pennsylvania to stop Gosnell’s operation.  The refusal to address numerous reports and complaints over a years-long period was “by design,” the grand jury emphasized, as the political and regulatory establishments chose to protect abortionists rather than the women they maimed and the children they killed.

Pennsylvania isn’t the only state with designs to protect abortionists, either.  Earlier this week, Michigan Live and WOOD TV exposed the cronyism and official neglect that allowed a now-defunct abortion clinic to operate while owned by a convicted felon and piling up complaint after complaint:”

“Michigan lawmakers say that an alleged conflict of interest on the state Board of Medicine allowed a Muskegon doctor, who served time in prison and whose abortion clinic recently closed due to unsanitary conditions, to continue performing abortions despite complaints of “horrendous” misconduct.”

“MLive and The Muskegon Chronicle reported that Dr. Robert Alexander’s abortion clinic was closed in December after police discovered “filthy” and unsanitary conditions throughout the Muskegon clinic, including “blood on the floor and walls in multiple locations.”

Turns out the Board Chairman responsible for deciding an investigation was un-necessary was also the same guy who mentored this felon in the 90’s, and helped him get his license back after he lost it for selling illegal prescriptions. Sounds like another Gosnell type clinic, and operator.

____________________________________________________

9 thoughts on “News/Politics 5-6-13

  1. Many of those on the left desire to have a Government Relationship with the Church like we see in China. In China, you can have Church as long as you sign a Government Pledge to support the views of the Government, If Church does not do that. The Government treats that Church and the people of the church like Criminals.
    This is the direction the many in the left desire our Government to go. We see this being played out in the Military, when they use the term proselytizing, who are they targeting? They are not targeting the liberal Churches, they are no long preach God’s Word, but promotes the ideas of the far left society. They are targeting the Christian Churches that believes that God’s Word is true, that our society has reject God’s Standard, and the only answer for man is to repent turn form their wicked ways and embrace Jesus Christ and the Word of God.
    We see it in the debate over Gay Rights, when the idea of hate, bigotry, intolerances, are throw out. Who are they targeting? They are not targeting the liberal Churches, they are no long preach God’s Word, but promotes the ideas of the far left society. They are targeting the Christian Churches that believes that God’s Word is true, that our society has reject God’s Standard, and the only answer for man is to repent turn form their wicked ways and embrace Jesus Christ and the Word of God. They are telling the Christian’s Churches that run adoption clinics, welfare clinics, that unless you abounding your faith and promote and embrace their ideas, you cannot operation under certain States laws and Federal Laws.
    We see this in the debate over Separation of Church and State, when they protest or file laws suites to prevent Certain Christian from speaking at events. Who are they targeting? They are not targeting the liberal Churches and speakers, they are no long preach God’s Word, but promotes the ideas of the far left society. They are targeting the Christian Churches and speakers that believes that God’s Word is true, that our society has reject God’s Standard, and the only answer for man is to repent turn form their wicked ways and embrace Jesus Christ and the Word of God. We see this play out with how the left handles Christian Churches and Speakers versus the speakers coming from liberal Churches.
    If the left have their way, our Government will treat the Christian Church the same way China treats the Christian Church, with being label a rogue church against the law and imprisonment. Those may say that is not going to happen, I point you to the military today, and what will happen if the left gets their way.

    Like

  2. michelle — good well argued piece. The comparison to the NRA’s no-compromise position is apt …. both groups refuse to give an inch to their opponents in fear of giving a mile. And the comparison to Europe is also interesting. Because the debate is not polarized in Europe, a compromise of about 12-20 weeks has been set in most countries. The polarized US debate even has an influence in Canada where the Conservative PM refuses to allow his caucus present anti-abortion bills for fear of opening the debate at all (its also a political loss for conservatives). Thus Canada has no abortion law.

    Like

  3. But there’s a difference in how much each group’s position is compromised, hwesseli. We do have a number of gun regulation laws and background checks, etc., on the books in the U.S. What kinds anti-abortion laws are there of similar substance? How much work did it take to get those passed?

    Like

  4. Solarpancake, I was also very disappointed in Ryan. To me, the issue of adoption by homosexuals is more important that homosexual marriage. I believe the states should not let homosexuals adopt children. Russia, of all countries, has acted to keep its children from being adopted by homosexuals in France.

    Like

  5. Its a matter of perception. Pro-gun control types will point to spread of concealed carry laws and the expiry of the assault weapon ban as backward steps. The farce in the senate in which the simple step of extending the same rules which gun shops operate on to the internet was defeated. Ted Cruz declaring he thought extending rules to internet sales was step one in taking away guns was the height of an all or nothing approach.

    Like

  6. I agree with you, RickyWeaver. I think homosexual adoption is more troubling than homosexual marriage (so-called).

    hwesseli, well anything could be called a matter of perception, but that wouldn’t mean one side’s perception is more or less accurate than the other’s. This comparison between the NRA and abortion rights advocates shows how the terms of the debate are currently, usually dictated by “the left.” World of difference between the two groups, and any comparison in style of argumentation is thin; doesn’t really speak to anything all that important.

    Like

Leave a reply to michelle Cancel reply