Tag Archives: Libya


About a year ago President Barack Obama was caught on an open mic saying to then Russian President Medvedev that he, Obama, would have more flexibility after the election.  What the Russian leader heard of course was – Russia will have more flexibility if Obama is re-elected.  And so they have.  And so has Iran, Syria, Libya, Egypt and the whole Muslim Middle East.

Fifty two Americans were held hostage for 444 days during Jimmy Carter’s presidency.  The day Reagan was sworn in replacing Carter as President, Saddam Hussein knew he had lost his flexibility and immediately released all hostages.  Less than a week after Obama’s re-election Syria launched rockets into Israel’s Golan Heights.  It is the same Golan Heights that Syria invaded and started the 7 Day War in 1967.  Now Assad knows all he has to fear is a demand from the U.S. that he stop annoying Israel and a request for negotiation.  America isn’t the only nation that lost the election; Israel lost too.


First it was a spontaneous eruption by a few members of a group of demonstrators and it was mere coincidence that the raid happened to occur on the 11th day of September.  The Libyan people were horrified and even helped carry Ambassador Chris Stevens to the hospital, so said Hillary Clinton in the Secretary’s first public statement about the attack.  Then the details morphed a few times until now we are at “Al Qaeda did it”  and the ambassador’s body was paraded through the streets in triumph.  What was so difficult about saying this was an operation planned for September 11th and carried out by a brand of Islamic extremists whose work is all too familiar to us?

It would not reflect well on Islam, of course.  It would place full responsibility for the atrocity on certain elements from the Muslim world and not hold the United States in any way accountable for the overrunning of its Libyan embassy and the murder of its own ambassador.  Any other administration would have said something like that.  But not this one.

The bombing of trains in Madrid, subways in London, a night club in Bali and the World Trade Center in New York are atrocities in plain sight.  They cannot be denied.  And these may be the least of it if you add up all the local killings by Islamists that have occurred over the years in schools, airports, markets and even on military bases.  If such inhumanities are not acknowledged as an element of the Muslim world, then the only alternative is they must be the Muslim world.  That of course is not the case.

Obama’s father was a Muslim.  Obama spent some his early formative years in a Muslim country attending Muslim schools.  It is understandable that he would be sympathetic to the plights and beliefs of Muslim believers.  There is nothing wrong with that.  In fact he is in a unique position to bring some understanding between people of the Muslim and Western worlds.  But it has to start with acknowledgement and unqualified severe condemnation of Islamic militant Jihad and terrorism.  Only then can understanding begin.  Sadly, Obama won’t do that.


Susan Rice, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations told ABC News the attack on our embassy was a spontaneous eruption by demonstrators; it was not a pre-planned event.  Her statement is in direct contrast to that made by Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif who not only said the event was pre-planned but added that the Libyan government warned us about it three days in advance.

These statements are in direct conflict with each other so there can be no question but that one of the two nations is not telling the truth.

A pre-planned attack on the United States by a Muslim faction in Libya does not bode well for Obama who has Muslim roots and has trumpeted his ability reduce hostilities and bring understanding between the modern day Barbary Pirates and the United States.  The administration is trying to characterize the killing of Ambassador Stevens, the parading of his body through the streets, the burning of American flags around the world and the storming of our embassies as something other than hostility against the United States.  This is absurd enough on its face, but pre-planned attacks make the claim even less credible.  The role of an ambassador is to convey the position and policy of the leader of the nation they serve.  Ambassadors are given little discretion to make critical pronouncements of their own.  Susan Rice was appointed by Barack Obama.

To be a spontaneous reaction we must believe that demonstrators routinely carry enough weapons to breach our security of the Libyan embassy, capture and kill the ambassador and destroy two buildings within the compound.  Susan Rice’s statement defies common sense.

Truth is becoming ever more difficult to discern.  There was a time when in a case of conflicting claims between Libya and the U.S. we felt comfortable with the judgment that our spokesperson was the one far more likely to be telling the truth.  We no longer have the luxury of making such assumptions.

UPDATE:  One thing admirable about Susan Rice is she is uncomfortable when she is lying.  It shows in the video of her statement.


Four of our diplomats were slaughtered inside of the American Embassy in Libya when protesters heavily armed with guns and explosives stormed the compound.  The American flag was torn down inside the embassy in Tunisia and the Al Qaeda flag raised in its place.  Rioting Muslims are burning the American flag in the street outside the American embassy in London.  Newspaper headlines are reporting that riots against America are breaking out around the globe.

Obama sends Jay Carney to explain to the American people that these acts are not against America, it’s just that some Muslims didn’t like a film.  The exact words issued by the White House through their spokesman were:

“This is not a case of protests directed at the United States writ large or at U.S. policy, this is in response to a video that is offensive to Muslims’

Our credit rating was just downgraded again today from AA to AA-.  The unemployment rate has remained over 8% longer than any period since the Great Depression of the 30’s.  So many have dropped completely out of the job market that 88 million Americans do not have a job; that’s one out of every three that is not employed.  And this President thinks he should be re-elected?


It was a street vendor in Tunisia and the facilitation of the Internet that led to the dictator’s death.  I am surprised Al Gore isn’t taking credit for it.  After all, he invented the internet.

Mohamed Bouazizi set his body on fire in a public act of suicide on January 4th when a Tunisian official confiscated the goods he was selling from his cart.  Public outrage went viral over the internet and the Arab Spring was sprung.  It was local rioting that started the action in Libya.  It was Libyan guerillas that carried out the fight.  It was a local guerilla that killed Gaddafi’s after he had been captured alive.  Obama has been busy assassinating other people.  But he never did get Gaddafi.

Of course, Obama is taking the credit for removing the brutal dictator from power.  Let’s remember that when the al qaeda-like Muslim Brotherhood takes control.  France and Europe beware; your invaders are gaining control of your oil supply.  Ladies, put your burkas on, stay in the house and prepare to share your husbands.  United Nations, congratulations!  You have a new candidate to chair the Human Rights Council.


The New York Times had the following to say regarding the Commander in Chief’s ordering of U.S. participation in the Libyan hostilities.

President Obama rejected the views of top lawyers at the Pentagon and the Justice Department when he [Obama] decided that he had the legal authority to continue American military participation in the air war in Libya without Congressional authorization.

Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, had told the White House that they believed that the United States military’s activities in the NATO-led air war amounted to “hostilities.” [that] required Mr. Obama to terminate or scale back the mission after May 20.

Presidents have the legal authority to override the legal conclusions of the Office of Legal Counsel and to act in a manner that is contrary to its advice, but it is extraordinarily rare for that to happen. Under normal circumstances, the office’s interpretation of the law is legally binding on the executive branch.

It was strictly a matter of copy and paste from NY Times to the RandomThots post other than minor editing, within the brackets, for clarity.  You can read the original article by clicking here.

My question is – what would you have written for a headline?  Perhaps “President Defies Legal Opinion of Government Counsel’? Or how about ”Obama Acts Contrary to Law According to Department of Justice and Pentagon Attorney”.  As a former headline copy writer, I can see that’s too long.  Here’s my choice, “Obama Decline to Obey the Law”.

The Times headline — “2 Top Lawyers Lost to Obama in Libya War Policy Debate”.


Except for Lochherbie, Libya has been a fairly passive enemy of the United States. If Qadhafi emerges from this war in full control of most of the country, passive will turn to active. Libya will become the new Afghanistan, yet more. Qadhafi will give refuge to anti-American terrorists and welcome organizations seeking a safe haven for terrorist training grounds.

Unlike Afghanistan, Libya is wealthy and not a lesser known isolationist nation run by a small impoverished religious group as Afghanistan was prior to 911. Qadhafi is crazy, but crazy like a fox with a lot of money and bent on revenge. Obama has shown America to be a weak horse. The superpower is super no more. (A temporary condition, we hope) Qadhafi will feel he has defeated both Europe and the US. Indeed, he will be correct.

Recently we learned that Qadhafi supported Louis Farrakhan by providing the money for construction of the magnificent headquarters of Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam in Chicago (Where else!). This financial support was fairly innocuous but it shows that Qadhafi is willing to put some of his vast store of money into support of subversive elements in America. And, compared to Qadhfi, George Soros is poverty stricken.

We need a strong man in the White House. A strong lady would do as well. What we don’t need is a gentlemen negotiator. The Right senses this. That is why people like Chris Christie, Govs. Walker of Wisconsin and LePage of Maine are so cheered for their actions. It’s why a loose cannon like Bachman has outraised Romney in the drive for campaign funding.

The greatness that is America has not withered. It has only become latent from lack of leadership. There are good candidates out there who can turn us back around on the right course again. We just need to elect them.


Hillary Clinton held a press conference today were she sought to re-confirm once more again the various positions the Obama administration holds on Libya. “Let me be clear,” she said “we are not seeking regime change in Libya. We just want Qadafi (sic) to step down and let the rebels run the country so we can find out who they are.” The Secretary added “I also want to assure you that Barack and I are more or less in complete agreement on that. I want to refudiate the contrary insinuendo that’s coming from the right wing conservative conspiracists, before it becomes a rumor.”

In other news, the Senate, Obama and all the czars have agreed to accept the Republican budget proposal, subject to UN approval, of course. Russia and China indicate they will vote in favor of the measure, saying it will help set America on the path to austerity. However, the Ambassador from England said “NO” to the U.S. request, “Not after the way you returned our bust! We aren’t too happy with the way Michelle patted our Queen on the rump, either.”

Later in the day, the President went to the White House gym to dribble, and shoot a few hoops. He winked and said “It relieves the stress, you know.”

For more photoshop images, visit FreakingNews.com


Bullet points from a recent issue of the London Daily Mail

• Tensions with Britain as Gates rebukes UK government over suggestion Gaddafi could be assassinated
• French propose a new political ‘committee’ to oversee operations
• Germany pulls equipment out of NATO coalition over disagreement over campaign’s direction
• Italians accuse French of backing NATO in exchange for oil contracts
• No-fly zone called into question after first wave of strikes ‘neutralises’ Libyan military machine
• U.K. ministers say war could last ’30 years’
• Italy to ‘take back control’ of bases used by allies unless NATO leadership put in charge of the mission
• Russians tell U.S. to stop bombing in order to protect civilians – calls bombing a ‘crusade’


The world has lost its strong voice. The Americans have abdicated their position of leadership. The action and inaction by our President is working toward bringing an end to the period of American exceptionalism that he believes never existed in the first place.

Europe is as rudderless and wimpish as ever. They took the lead in starting military action in Libya because we didn’t. Now they are shirking responsibility for it. Germany was like John Kerry, they were for it before they were against it. No one has any idea what to do next or how to carry out a final game plan. It doesn’t appear anyone even has a final game plan.

Obama justifies our participation with the same rationale the neo-cons employed to justify the invasion of Iraq, that is, to bring Democracy to a nation whose leader is a killer of his own people. That’s not a move to the center; it’s a move by a socialistic president in accordance with the agenda of elements of the far right.

The “conservative” token at the New York Times, Ross Douthout says our participation in the war in Libya is ”a stark departure from the Bush administration’s more unilateralist methods”. Yet Bush sought and received the clear approval of Congress before taking military action; while Obama never even consulted Congress, let alone seek their approval. Democrats are led in revolt by Denis Kucinich who has asked why Obama should not be impeached for acting alone. Douthout is the Times’ vision of condescension into conservative thought. So much for the New York Times.

Both Bush and Obama sought UN approval. Obama yielded to the limitations imposed by the UN as to how the world wants the war to be fought. .Bush acted in what he saw as the best interests of the United States, not in deference to the Security Council dominated by Russia and China.

At home, Obama assigns Joe Biden to deal with the Republicans on the budget while he shoots a few baskets and vacations in Rio de Janeiro.