Daniel Greenfield is one of the most incisive investigative journalists around at the moment, and he never disappoints when delving into the cloistered lives of those who would bring the Republic down – especially someone as despicable as Hillary Rodham Clinton. In his excellent piece coming up (very timely by the fact that as I pen this piece, HRC is lying her way through her opening remarks to the Congressional Committee Hearing on Benghazi) Mr. Greenfield lays bare the provable facts that should restrict in the strongest possible fashion, her attempt at becoming president. If she is the best that the DemoMarxists have then We The People are in greater danger than we figure.
As a matter of journalistic fact, Daniel Greenfield has produced a superb take down of Hillary and the venal, ruthless, rapacious, hypocritical Left to which she belongs. In the absence of a national media, HRC’s foul lies can provide her with cover, but there is more truth in this article than in the last 10,000 editions of the New York Times combined. HRC is using power with wanton disregard for human life – American or otherwise – and is essentially the same as any mafia king pin, tin-pot dictator, or Muslim ruler. She craves power to enrich herself while sadistically punishing anyone who crosses her. The cowardly media hates her but still won’t expose the full extent of her evil. That this nation elected Obama twice is beyond disturbing, but that HRC is the leading candidate for the DemoMarxist Party is arguably even worse and is a condemnation of a large percentage of an American population that simply has no moral compass whatsoever.
My forced discipline in listening to some of Hillary’s opening statements during the past hour where she cites “expert State Department diplomats”, our European allies, and the Arab League tells me that she is completely incompetent. First of all, “expert State Department diplomats” that recommended saving the Libyan people from Gaddafi, are the same expert State Department diplomats that recommended saving the Afghanistan people from the Taliban. In other words, they don’t have a flying clue. Like in Afghanistan for instance, where the people in reality are our own eternal mortal enemies, the people as well in Libya are also our own eternal mortal enemies, because they are Muslims and all Muslims in the world are our own eternal mortal enemies and the eternal mortal enemies of all infidels in the world, including our alleged allies in the Arab League.
The problem we have is no one in our government whatsoever has the first inkling about Islam and our Islamic enemies. Even though the first rule of war is to know your enemy as well as we know ourselves, no one has the first damn clue. It’s amazing. Hence, the inevitable result is they are all being very easily duped, conned, and manipulated by Muslims. Indeed, they are all bumbling idiots (cue Heinz Baked Beans Kerry).
In fact, the so-called “expert State Department diplomats” Hillary cites are nothing but perpetual morons. If she relied on them as she claims she did, then no wonder Libya ended up the mess it did. Of course, no one with expert knowledge of Islam could survive in our federal government today, since they would all inevitably get weeded out on the grounds that they are Islamophobes. Indeed, nothing must ever challenge their fallacy that Islam is a so-called “religion of peace” and the vast overwhelming majority of Muslims in the world are so-called “moderate Muslims.”
The first thing that we need to do or should do is shut down the State Department and create a new office of Foreign Ministry staffed by real experts this time around instead of leftwing ideologues that are little more than gullible useful idiots.
I’d better get to Daniel Greenfield and “Hillary’s Libyan Lies” before I completely lose it…
Hillary Clinton has only one accomplishment; the Libyan War. Bombing Libya in support of a Muslim Brotherhood takeover was Hillary’s pet project. Obama unenthusiastically signed off on a war that he had told members of Congress “is all Secretary Clinton’s matter.”
The Pentagon fought Hillary’s illegal war every step of the way. Both the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs opposed Hillary’s plan to bomb Libya. One of the Chairman’s top aides said that he did not trust the reports coming out of the State Department and the CIA, then controlled by Clinton loyalist Leon Panetta. When it was clear that the Clintonites had gotten their war on, an irritated Secretary of Defense Gates resigned after failing to stop Hillary’s war and was replaced by Panetta.
As the State Department set the military agenda, the Pentagon retaliated by taking over the diplomatic agendaattempting to arrange a ceasefire with the Gaddafi regime over Hillary’s objections.
Hillary was using the State Department to start a war while the military was trying to use diplomacy to stop a war. The Pentagon lost the power struggle and one of her minions took over the military to make sure that the Muslim Brotherhood’s Jihadists would be able to overrun another country.
Huma Abedin had beaten the Secretary of Defense.
Panetta, unlike Gates, shared Hillary’s Arab Spring agenda. After the war, he paid a visit to Tripoli and claimed that similar “uprisings” would be taking place around the Middle East, including in Syria.
Military people never stopped loathing Hillary Clinton for her war and its consequences, the usurpation of a defense matter, the Al Qaeda training camps and the abandonment of Americans in Benghazi. That came to the surface during the Democratic debate when Senator Webb challenged Clinton on Libya.
Hillary Clinton smugly recited the same old lies about Gaddafi “threatening to massacre large numbers of the Libyan people” and European allies begging her to stop a “mass genocide.”
In reality, Hillary Clinton was the source of the claim that Gaddafi was about to commit genocide. This claim had no basis in reality and defense officials quickly shot it down. But that didn’t stop Obama from claiming during his war speech that he had bombed Libya to save Benghazi from a massacre. There was no massacre in Benghazi. At least not until Obama helped make a massacre of four Americans happen.
By September, the New York Times was asking where all the dead were. Morgue records showed that the dead on both sides actually numbered in the hundreds. The International Red Cross put the number of missing persons at around a thousand. The largest mass grave found had 34 bodies.
Obama claimed that he had seen Gaddafi “kill over a thousand people in a single day.” That never happened. It never happened when Gaddafi had actually captured a rebel city before.
“Imagine we were sitting here and Benghazi had been overrun, a city of 700,000 people, and tens of thousands of people had been slaughtered,” Hillary Clinton had said. That would be more than the entire number of people, combatants and civilians, who had died in the Libyan Civil War.
Gaddafi was an insane dictator, but he had never done anything on that scale, nor were his forces, which had been beaten by Chad in the Toyota War (Chad militias had fought using Toyota pickups), remotely capable of pulling off Saddam level of atrocities or he might have won the war.
Hillary Clinton claimed at the debate, “We had the Arabs standing by our side saying, ‘We want you to help us deal with Gadhafi.’” But by the second night of bombing, the Secretary-General of the Arab League had already condemned the “bombardment of civilians.”
“We did not put one single American soldier on the ground in Libya,” Hillary Clinton said. That’s technically true and also a lie. It was Panetta’s CIA people who were on the ground.
Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, two of the Americans murdered in Benghazi, were former Navy SEAL commandos who were working as contractors for the CIA. American soldiers still died in Libya. They were just officially contractors, more of the CIA’s “Sneakers on the Ground” approach that let hacks like Hillary and Obama claim that there were no American soldiers on the ground.
“The Libyan people had a free election the first time since 1951,” Hillary Clinton said. “And you know what, they voted for moderates, they voted with the hope of democracy.”
When Hillary says “moderate”, she means Islamist. The election was fake. It was rigged between the “moderate Islamist” Muslim Brotherhood and the “moderate Islamist” National Forces Alliance. While the media was repeating talking points about the fake election, fighting in Benghazi continued. But even though Hillary and Obama had used Benghazi as the basis for the war, no one was paying attention.
That would change soon enough. And before long every American would know the name Benghazi. But Benghazi was only an early warning. Before long entire Libyan cities would fall to Al Qaeda and ISIS.
Hillary closed by insisting, “Unless you believe the United States should not send diplomats to any place that is dangerous, which I do not, then when we send them forth, there is always the potential for danger and risk.”
Sending diplomats to dangerous places means providing them with adequate security.
Hillary’s State Department failed to do that. Even the whitewashed report of her cronies admitted that much. Benghazi’s compound was being protected by “moderate Islamist” terrorists who overlapped with the other “moderate Islamist” terrorists who attacked the diplomatic compound.
While Hillary’s State Department was spending fortunes on bad art, the Benghazi compound didn’t meet security standards in a city that had more terrorists than police officers.
And, best of all, the Muslim Brotherhood Martyrs of the Feb. 17 Revolution Brigade terrorists Hillary was paying to protect the ambassador, hadn’t even been paid.
Benghazi was a city that was effectively under the control of Jihadists, some of them blatantly identifying with Al Qaeda. Hillary Clinton might as well have sent Ambassador Stevens into an Al Qaeda training camp with terrorists providing his security. And that’s effectively what she did.
Her dismissive line about sending diplomats to dangerous places whitewashes what happened.
Now that we’ve cleared away Hillary’s lies, let’s get to the truth. The Libyan War, like the rest of the Arab Spring, was about empowering the Muslim Brotherhood.
And there were cruder motives in the mix.
Hillary Clinton hid emails discussing the exploitation of Libya’s oil fields. The Clintons had made an art out of merging their political and financial agendas. They had extensive ties with figures in the energy industry and the companies that dug into Libya’s energy sector, Royal Dutch Shell and BP, were Clinton Foundation donors.
Some of the deleted emails discussed this with Clinton Foundation employee Sidney Blumenthal, who was also providing Hillary Clinton with supposed intel from business interests while promising that the Libyan War would be an easy matter. Blumenthal encouraged “shock and awe” bombing in Libya.
According to Congressman Gowdy, who has been investigating the events in Benghazi, “Blumenthal pushed hard for a no-fly zone in Libya before the idea was being discussed internally by senior U.S. government officials.” He blasted Obama for being “unenthusiastic about regime change in Libya.”
Blumenthal called for providing the Jihadists with “armor piercing weapons” and called Secretary of Defense Gates a “mean, vicious little prick” who is “losing” the debate. Blumenthal also offered the very specific “national interest” argument that Obama would later echo, suggesting that he was unknowingly repeating the talking points of a man he loathed which had been handed to him by Hillary Clinton.
He also told Hillary Clinton that the war had to be ramped up or Obama would lose the election.
Having dragged Obama into Hillary’s war, Blumenthal was now pushing Hillary to blackmail him with the threat of losing the election if he didn’t escalate the conflict. Meanwhile he was pursuing his interest in getting the Libyans to pay for military training from a private military company he was linked to.
The entire nightmarish mess of Democratic conspiracy theories about Iraq, Blood for Oil, politicians fighting wars to win elections, corporate conflicts of interest and even private military companies are all here and no one will touch it. A roster of Democratic candidates still running against the Iraq War won’t talk about an illegal dirty regime change war that took place with their backing and support.
Bernie Sanders, who sputters incoherently about the Iraq War, co-sponsored the Senate resolution supporting a No Fly Zone in Libya. This was the Senate resolution that Obama exploited as a fig leaf of Senate approval for his illegal war.
Senator Sanders can’t criticize Hillary’s illegal war because he helped make it happen.
Hillary’s war has been an unmitigated disaster. Her lies about the war have been disproven. But not even the Democrats running against her are ready to hold her accountable for it.
Source Daniel Greenfield and FrontPageMag; personal archives…