13 Americans Dead… The Suspect? President Obama

July 15, 2013 by Floyd G. Brown 6 Comments

inShare5

Washington, D.C. is a town run largely by lawyers. Naturally, this leads to a ton of convoluted and unnecessary legislation. And this overabundance of legality often leads to twisted logic in our nation’s capital – and confusion for us.

Take the two hotly debated (and often misused) words: “coup” and “terrorism.”
You see, when the Egyptian military recently ousted President Mursi, most of the world called that a coup. But for reasons you’ll see in a moment, the Obama administration doesn’t see it that way.
Then there’s Major Nidal Hasan’s attack on Fort Hood, Texas on November 5, 2009 – which left 13 people dead and 30 injured. You’d probably file that one under an act of terror. But according to Obama, you’d be wrong.
Time to shed some light on this classic Washington head fake. Technically Speaking…
“Coup d’état” is a French word that made its way into the English language.  The Oxford Dictionary identifies it as a French expression, meaning a “stroke of state.”

Military historian Edward Luttwak says that “[a] coup consists of the infiltration of a small, but critical, segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder.”
So, when the Egyptian military grabbed power and imprisoned President Mohamed Mursi, headlines across the world (correctly) screamed “Coup in Egypt.”
Yet in the Obama administration, twisted words reign, and take on surreal meanings. And in this case, they’re simply insisting that the situation in Egypt isn’t actually a coup.
Why?
Well, the Foreign Assistance Act states that if the “duly elected head of government is deposed by military act or decree,” then the United States must stop providing aid.
But Obama desperately wants to continue pumping $1.55 billion in aid to Egypt. And as I explained back in June, Egypt is collapsing and ungovernable. Without the continued flow of aid, the collapse will accelerate, and Egypt’s government would likely vanish.
This is just another classic example of the Obama team’s complete disregard for the law. And if Obama says it’s not a coup, then it’s not. Period.
More Than Semantics
A similar twist of words is playing out in the Fort Hood case. Obama’s lawyers insist that Hasan isn’t a terrorist, and that his attack is “work place violence” rather than an act of terrorism.
Talk about splitting hairs.
According to the FBI, Hasan was an avid reader of Jihadi websites. He worshipped at Jihadi-influenced mosques. Hasan even self-identifies as a “soldier of Allah.” He openly supported suicide attacks against non-Muslims, and received religious and operational inspiration from Anwar Al-Awlaki.
You may remember Al-Awlaki – he was the American citizen and al-Qaeda promoter killed by a U.S. drone because he was deemed a terrorist.
Now the administration’s refusal to call the Fort Hood attack a terrorist attack is seriously impacting the lives of the survivors and victims.
For example, the Pentagon refuses to treat the injured and dead as casualties of war. Consequently, they’ve been denied the Purple Heart medal that’s bestowed on Americans injured in battle.
The U.S. House even passed legislation to force the Pentagon to award the Purple Heart, along with disability and medical benefits associated with the honor, to the Fort Hood victims. Sadly, the legislation was killed by Obama supporters in the U.S. Senate.
Now the soldiers and their families are suing the Pentagon to reverse this decision in court. In the meantime, twisted interpretations by our government keep dollars flowing to Egypt while preventing us from adequately caring for injured Americans.
Unfortunately, laws are no good if the government can interpret their wording at will.
Your eyes on the Hill,  Floyd G. Brown
This commentary was originally published at CaptialHillDaily.com, and is reprinted here with permission.
Photo Credit:  Site.gov / Standard Compliant

Operation Jersey Shore Vacation offers an oceanside respite to US military families

A tiny New Jersey charity provides a place for military families to vacation along with gift cards for groceries, free meals, and island outings.

By David Karas, Contributor / July 15, 2013

• 

The Operation Jersey Shore Vacation team meets with leaders at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in central New Jersey to discuss the program, which donates an oceanside vacation to military families. From left, back row, CMSgt. Michael Ferraro; Col. John Wood, the Air Base Commander; and CMSgt. Terrence Greene. Front row: Paige Laurence and Amie Sinor of Operation Jersey Shore Vacation.

Courtesy of Operation Jersey Shore Vacation

Long Beach Island, N.J.

Summer is a time when many families take vacations to exciting or exotic places, whether across the world or just a drive down to a shore town along one of the coasts.

But for American military personnel and their families, such a luxury is not usually an option.
Operation Jersey Shore Vacation, the idea of a high school teen, is an innovative project that seeks to change that.
Lexi Sinor was a junior in high school when, in 2009, she came up with the plan to work with her father, Randy – a real estate agent – to identify homeowners with summer homes who would be willing to donate a week-long stay to members of the armed forces to allow them the chance to partake in a luxury so infrequent for those in the military.

RECOMMENDED: What kind of giver are you? Take the quiz

After Lexi moved to Utah to attend college, her sister, Amie, now 17, stepped up to the plate. And the project quickly became something Amie is passionate about.
“It is great to see them when they come in,” Amie says of the families they provide vacations for. “I have been raised to give back whenever I can … it makes me feel good.”
Now in its fifth summer, Operation Jersey Shore Vacation works closely with military leaders at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in central New Jersey and with the owners of summer homes to identify qualified military families and to secure a home for them to stay in for a week at the New Jersey shore.
Beyond just providing the space for a family to enjoy, the project also works with local vendors and community groups to provide gift cards for groceries and other necessities, as well as free meals or outings on the island.
One location, Fantasy Island,  provides the families with free access to its rides, games, and other attractions as a special honor to service members.
“Being down here and having this chance to be together on a vacation – I think that is just real quality time for everybody to reconnect,” says Mr. Sinor, who added that he has no trouble finding support from local businesses or homeowners to make such vacations a reality.
One impetus for starting the program came when his oldest daughter was traveling in Italy between Florence and Rome and an earthquake struck, Sinor says. It took some 16 hours for the family to find out that she was safe. That experience, he says, resonated with the family as an example of what the families of US military personnel go through on a regular basis.
“We appreciate so much what the individual military people and their families sacrifice for us,” he says.
Seeing the families with children enjoying the rides and games along the coastline is a memory he won’t soon forget, Sinor says.
“It is special to them,” he says, noting the impact such experiences can have on young children. “That’s a memory they might not otherwise have had.”
While running the program takes a lot of time and dedication from an already busy high school senior, Amie says it has become something she is passionate about. The teen still visits each family during its stay – to date, more than 25 families in the five summers the program has been in operation.
“It does take a lot of time, but it is totally worth it,” she says. “When you see the families … and how happy they are to be together, it is just priceless.”
The Sinor family now is working to obtain 501c3 nonprofit status for their program.
This summer, the shore also may be visited by a family or two who have been displaced by the tornadoes in Oklahoma. At the time of a recent interview, Amie was working to identify times for a pair of Oklahoma families to travel to the New Jersey shore to get some much-needed rest and relaxation.

RECOMMENDED: What kind of giver are you? Take the quiz

Heather Lamb fondly recalls the vacation her family was able to take through the project last summer, when they spent a week on New Jersey's Long Beach Island. She enjoyed the week-long reprieve along with her husband, Benjamin, and two of their three sons – Connor and Keegan.
“It was the first vacation ever for the family,” Mrs. Lamb says. “Due to my husband’s deployment schedules, we never got time to actually plan everything. You cannot make plans – it is very difficult.”
She said that every detail of the week – from the honors they received at local businesses to the memories they created together – was priceless.
“It was the best week we had,” she says. “It was so relaxing. We were so humbled and overwhelmed with the generosity.”
• For more information on Operation Jersey Shore Vacation, to apply for a vacation, or to support the effort, visit www.ojsv.org.

George Zimmerman’s Old MySpace Surfaces: Full of Racist Statements and Admissions of Criminal Activity!

well i guess obama will have the race war with the blacks and his mexicans drug dealers 

Posted on July 15, 2013

Huffington Post’s Gene Demby seems to have dug up an old MySpace page belonging to George Zimmerman, the man who shot and killed Trayvon Martin and is charged with his murder, makes disparaging comments about Mexicans and details his response to a criminal case against him in 2005.
The page was first made public by the Miami Herald. Zimmerman’s lawyer, Mark O’Mara, confirmed that the page is George Zimmerman’s MySpace, but has been unused for years.
On Zimmerman’s legal defense fund website, his lawyers admit that the page “will cast Mr. Zimmerman in a less-than-favorable light especially considering the charges he faces.”
“In that regard, it is possible that the statements Mr. Zimmerman made could be used as part of the trial, and therefore it is our policy not to comment directly on items that could become evidence,” the site read. The statement also indicated that the social media accounts of “all the parties” involved might come under scrutiny, and may be introduced at the trial as evidence.
Photos on Zimmerman’s MySpace page show Zimmerman, who calls himself “Joe G.,” with groups of friends. In his biographical blurb, he discusses things he doesn’t miss about his former home in Manassas, Virginia:

I dont miss driving around scared to hit mexicans walkin on the side of the street, soft ass wanna be thugs messin with peoples cars when they aint around (what are you provin, that you can dent a car when no ones watchin) dont make you a man in my book. Workin 96 hours to get a decent pay check, gettin knifes pulled on you by every mexican you run into!”

In an August 24, 2005 blog post, he boasts about his relief about the proceedings in a criminal case.

Im still free! The ex hoe tried her hardest, but the judge saw through it! Big Mike, reppin the Dverse security makin me look a million bucks, broke her down! Thanks to everyone for checkin up on me! Stay tuned for the A.T.F. charges……

A few days later, he expresses happiness that the other charges against him were reduced to misdemeanors.

2 felonies dropped to 1 misdemeanor!!!!!!!!!!! The man knows he was wrong but still got this hump, Thanks to everyone friends and fam, G baby you know your my rock!

In 2005, a 20-year-old Zimmerman was arrested and charged after an altercation with a police officer. The same year, his ex-fianceé filed a restraining order against him and accused him of domestic violence.
The 28-year-old Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black 17-year-old, on the night of Feb. 26. The case has garnered international attention, as many have called the case an example of rampant racial profiling, and have called for a repeal of Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” gun laws.
Social media has played a major role in the case so far. News about the case spread virally on sites like Facebook and Twitter before it was picked up by mainstream outlets, and Martin’s since-deleted tweets were made public by the Daily Caller, a conservative news website. One of Martin’s accounts, called “NO_LIMIT_NIGGA,” in which Martin is shown with gold fronts in his mouth and talking about drug use, was seen by many Zimmerman supporters as evidence that the slain teenager was a hoodlum.
“These were not protected tweets,” the site’s editor told The Huffington Post about the decision to run Martin’s tweets, which were from an account that was no longer active. “While he was alive, these were not outside of the public sphere in any shape or form.

25 Shocking Photos From Zimmerman Riots Sweeping The Nation

• Like this slideshow? →
• Share
• Tweet
• Email

George Zimmerman has been acquitted of all charges after shooting and killing black teen Trayvon Martin. He is a free man.
But furious Trayvon Martin supporters all across America have taken to the streets, and are wreaking havoc in multiple cities — most notably New York, DC, Atlanta, and Los Angeles. Here are some photos from the protests, which got violent at times:

THANKS OBAMA

NOW WE HAVE A RACE WAR
HOPE AL SHARPIN HELPS YOU GET OUT OF THIS ONE
NEVER IN MY LIFE HAVE I EVER SEEN ANY ONE AS EVIL AS YOU TOO
HOPE YOU BOTH GO WERE THE SUN DONT SHINE

Gay marriage to become legal within days after Lords drop opposition

GAY marriage could become legal within days after controversial legislation passed through the House of Lords unopposed today.

By: Owen Bennett

Published: Mon, July 15, 2013

0Comments

Gay rights campaigners have welcomed the passing of the Bill through the House of Lords

My life and many others will be better today than it was yesterday.

Openly gay Labour peer Lord Alli

All that remains for the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill is to clear the House of Commons tomorrow, where it is expected to go through with little debate.

Gay rights campaigners have called today's development as "momentous", but those opposed to the Bill are worried it will change the "structure of society."

Speaking during the debate, openly gay Labour peer Lord Alli thanked peers in an emotional speech, and said: "My life and many others will be better today than it was yesterday."

A one metre tall rainbow wedding cake was created by experimental baker Alice Gasson

ohn D. Carrion, Chairman of the London Gay Man's Choir.

The Bill has endured a stormy passage through Parliament, with 161 MPs voting against it in the Commons.

When it arrived in the House of Lords for its Second Reading, peers spent more than a day locked in debate before it was voted through with a majority of 242.

Tory Lord Cormack said the Bill's supporters had won, but added: "Although this may be a day of unqualified rejoicing for them, there are many in our country, who by no stretch of the imagination could be called homophobic or bigoted, who are unhappy about this Bill.

"They are unhappy about this Bill because it does change the structure of society by changing the definition of marriage."

He told the Bill's backers: "I understand that you feel euphoric today but please have a thought for those who have different views."

Lord Framlingham said today had the "potential to be a deeply sad day" for millions of people who believed in the "traditional family" and its fundamental role in the cohesion of the country.

The Bill still has to go through the House of Commons but is expected to be passed within days

Members of the London Gay Men's Choir perform in front of the Houses of Parliament

James-J Walsh, campaigns director of Out4Marriage said the Lords' approval of the Bill was "a momentous occasion in lesbian and gay equality", and vowed to fight to get the same law introduced in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

He said: "With this legislation Britain shines a light as one of the most progressive countries in the world, and manages to balance both lesbian and gay rights with religious freedoms.

Stonewall chief executive Ben Summerskill said: 'It's impossible to express how much joy this historic step will bring to tens of thousands of gay people and their families and friends.

"The Bill's progress through Parliament shows that, at last, the majority of politicians in both Houses understand the public's support for equality - though it's also reminded us that gay people still have powerful opponents."

Those opposed to the Bill were represented outside Parliament today

Anti-Gay Marriage protesters have vowed to fight on

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg told campaigners celebrating outside Parliament that the new law would ensure that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people felt "recognised and valued, not excluded".

Writing on the PinkNews website, the Liberal Democrat leader said: "Civil partnerships were a landmark reform. And not every couple, gay or straight, feels that they need to get married to affirm their commitment to each other.

"But only the right to marry, if that's what you so choose, is true equality.

"It lets every member - young or old - of our LGBT community know that they are recognised and valued, not excluded.

"It finally ensures that all loving couples have the freedom and right to make that commitment to each other in our society."

Labour leader Ed Miliband told PinkNews: "The last Labour government was responsible for landmark changes in the law such as repealing Section 28, equalising the age of consent and introducing civil partnerships.

"I am proud that equal marriage, a hugely important step forward in the fight for equality in Britain, is one which was achieved with the support of the whole of Labour's shadow cabinet and the vast majority of Labour MPs and peers."

Nick Clegg called the new law 'true equality'

Labour leader Ed Miliband said the law was a 'step forward in the fight for equality'

Paul Parker, recording clerk for Quakers in Britain said that today's development "brings us tantalisingly close to legal recognition for same-sex marriages in our Quaker meetings".

Along with the Unitarians and Free Christians and Liberal and Reformed Judaism, Quakers have made clear their intention to stage same-sex marriages once the law is changed.

Mr Parker said: "We relish the freedom to express our faith by treating all our committed couples in the same way. This is because of our deeply held belief that we see the light of God in everyone which leads us to respect the inherent worth of each individual and each loving relationship.

"The voice of minority faith groups has been heard on this. We respect others who do not yet share our view. For Quakers, this is a matter of religious freedom."

The Bill was met with fierce opposition as it passed through Parliament

Colin Hart, campaign director for the Coalition for Marriage, said that the group would "fight on" despite losing the parliamentary battle.

"Mr Cameron needs to remember that the Coalition for Marriage has nearly 700,000 supporters, nearly six times the number of members of the Conservative Party," said Mr Hart.

"They are just ordinary men and women, not part of the ruling elite. They are passionate, motivated and determined to fight on against a law that renders terms like husband and wife meaningless and threatens one of the foundations of the institution of marriage: fidelity and faithfulness."

Benghazi Investigation Deepens: Lawmakers Seek Interviews of 13 Officials Involved

5:16 PM, May 23, 2013 • By STEPHEN F. HAYES

       

Send to Kindle

Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

As the investigation into the Obama administration’s handling of the attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi intensifies, lawmakers on Capitol Hill are seeking to conduct transcribed interviews with thirteen top State Department officials in the coming weeks in order to learn more. Those named in the letter include a wide range of current and former State Department personnel, from senior advisers to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to mid-level career officials with responsibility for diplomatic security.

Among those officials: Jacob Sullivan, then deputy chief of staff and director of policy planning (and currently national security adviser to Vice President Joe Biden); Victoria Nuland, then State Department spokesman; Raymond Maxwell, deputy assistant secretary of state for near east affairs; Patrick Kennedy, undersecretary of state for management; and Eric Boswell, former assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security.

In a letter dated May 17, 2013, Representative Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, wrote to Secretary of State John Kerry to request formally that Kerry make these current and former State Department employees available. “The State Department employees whose testimony the Committee is seeking are critical fact witnesses who are positioned to shed light on what happened before, during and after the terrorist attacks that claimed the lives of four Americans in Benghazi.”

Related Stories

• Investigating ‘Command and Control’ in Benghazi ...
• State Dept. Report Lists 6 Terror Attacks Last Year in ...
• Petraeus’s Objection to the Benghazi Talking Points
• The Seeds of the Benghazi Talking Points
• White House Spokesman Throws State, CIA Under Bus

More by Stephen F. Hayes

• Lipstick on the Obamacare Pig
• Our Disappearing President
• Intel Chair: Release the Bin Laden Documents
• Let the Sunshine In
• What About the Video?

Issa reminded Kerry of his recent promise to run “an accountable and open State Department,” but noted that State’s “posture with respect to the congressional investigation of the Benghazi attacks has not lived up to your commitment to ‘provide answers.’” The State Department, Issa wrote, “continues to limit the Committee’s access to relevant documents and witnesses.” The transcribed interviews are likely a first step towards requesting—or demanding—congressional testimony for several of those listed.

In addition to the thirteen State Department officials, Issa’s committee will conduct a transcribed interview on June 3, with Ambassador Thomas Pickering, one of the two primary authors of the Administrative Review Board report on the Benghazi attacks. That investigation, which failed to interview Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other officials with knowledge of the attacks, has not fared well under the additional scrutiny that it has attracted as more information on the attacks has become public. Sources tell THE WEEKLY STANDARD that the committee will likely seek to interview Admiral Mike Mullen, the other chief author of the ARB report, at some point in the near future.

Republicans on the committee hope that the next round of interviews will provide a better sense of the State Department’s role in providing security before the attacks, in the deliberations about a military response during the attacks and in the creation of the administration’s public narrative after the attacks.

Sullivan figured prominently in emails sent between senior Obama administration officials about the formulation of Benghazi talking points that were distributed to policymakers in Congress and the executive branch in the aftermath of the attacks. An email from a United Nations staffer to Ambassador Susan Rice, who would present the administration’s case on five Sunday talk shows on September 16, reported that Sullivan would work with officials from the intelligence community on those talking points. Subsequent emails between Sullivan and the U.N. staffer showed efforts to ensure that Rice was kept in the loop on those talking points.

In another email exchange, this one with State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland, Sullivan reports that he will make edits to the talking points working with National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor. Nuland had previously objected to some of the language in the talking points, on the grounds that members of Congress would be in a position to say things that she had not been allowed to say and that members might criticize the State Department for ignoring warnings about previous attacks.

Sullivan, in his email to Nuland, wrote: “I spoke with Tommy. We’ll work through this in the morning and get comments back.” Moments later, Sullivan reiterated the point: “Talked to Tommy. We can make edits.”

The emails contradict claims from Jay Carney and others that neither the White House nor the State Department played a significant role in editing the talking points. Several major edits were made to the talking points at or following a meeting of senior Obama administration officials during a secure video teleconference on Saturday morning.

Benghazi Investigation Deepens: Lawmakers Seek Interviews of 13 Officials Involved

5:16 PM, May 23, 2013 • By STEPHEN F. HAYES

       

Send to Kindle

Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

Lawmakers want to ask Nuland about an email she sent expressing her concerns and those of her “building leadership” at the State Department to some of the contents of the talking points. In another email, Nuland notes that State Department leadership would be contacting the National Security Staff directly.

In testimony on January 23, Hillary Clinton claimed that the talking points were “an intelligence product” and that the “intelligence community was the principal decider about what went into the talking points.” But her testimony is contradicted by an email from the CIA’s Office of Public Affairs, which reported: “The State Department had major reservations with much or most of the document. We revised the document with their concerns in mind.”

Was Clinton involved in the revisions?

Beyond the talking points, lawmakers want answers to questions decisions on security before and during the attacks. Kennedy, who has testified previously about Benghazi, will no doubt face additional questions about his role in refusing to send the Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST) to Benghazi when the attack began. CBS’s Sharyl Attkisson reported this week that deployment of the FEST team to Benghazi was “ruled out from the start,” a “decision that became a source of internal dissent and the cause of puzzlement to some outsiders.” An official who spoke to Attkisson said that Kennedy dismissed the idea. 

Maxwell, who was placed on “administrative leave” last winter, recently told Josh Rogin of the Daily Beast that he had nothing to do with decision making on Benghazi. “I had no involvement to any degree with decisions on security and the funding of our security at our diplomatic mission in Benghazi,” Maxwell said. Maxwell’s punishment came after the release of the ARB report, and Rogin reports that Maxwell has never had access to the classified version of that report, where some of the State Department’s failures are laid out.

The same is true for Greg Hicks, former deputy chief of mission in Libya, who recently offered in congressional testimony a critical assessment of State Department leadership during and after the Benghazi attacks. Victoria Toensing, who is representing Hicks, says he has still not been allowed to review the classified version of the ARB report, despite his having been interviewed for it.

This lack of access to the classified ARB report is one of many questions Pickering will face when he is interviewed early next month. Why not let Hicks and others interviewed for the report see the final product?

In addition, lawmakers will press Pickering on a report that many consider to be a whitewash. Not only did the ARB team fail to interview Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, they didn’t speak with lower-level personnel in the chain of decision making who had volunteered to speak with them. One of those officials, Mark Thompson, the State Department’s acting deputy assistant secretary of state for counterterrorism, offered to share his experience from that evening with the ARB, but was never contacted for an interview.

Thompson was one of a handful of State Department officials who had a firsthand view of what was happening in Libya that night. When he learned that Ambassador Chris Stevens was missing and that others had sought safe haven, Thompson testified, he told his leadership at the State Department “that we needed to go forward and consider the deployment of the Foreign Emergency Support Team.”

“I notified the White House,” Thompson continued. “They indicated that meetings had already taken place that evening” and that FEST would not be deployed.

Did the ARB leadership believe this testimony wasn’t relevant to their investigation? Or was it inconvenient to the conclusion they wanted to reach?