Pro-ISIS hackers post ‘kill list’ with U.S. government names on it

Leave a comment

This is from Vocativ.

Yet the Obama Regime says and does nothing.

Dozens of names were distributed on the messaging app Telegram.


Hackers with a pro-ISIS group calling themselves the United Cyber Caliphate distributed a “kill” list on Monday that appears to include dozens of U.S. government personnel, Vocativ discovered.

The list features 43 names of people linked to the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the departments of defense, energy, commerce and health and services. It also identifies the U.S. embassies in Santiago and Kathmandu—as well as the Department of the Navy in Gulfport, Mississippi—as targets. It includes someone who appears to have worked for Australia’s Department of Defence.

While the group’s intentions are sinister, it’s unlikely that the so-called hack unveils much new or actionable information. The hackers list phone numbers with each person—many of which are general numbers for institutions or offices, though several appear to be correct, current office lines. The group also posted zip codes and cities—often listed as Washington, D.C.—allegedly affiliated with their targets, but no specific home or work addresses.

The information for each target was shared on individual photoshopped images posted on the Telegram group of the United Cyber Caliphate.  “Wanted to be killed” was written in English, Arabic, Spanish, Russian and French below every image, which also included the hacking group’s name and the logo for U.S. embassies.

Much of the information listed by the group is publicly available. Vocativ was able to verify that at least several of the people listed have worked for the U.S. government in various locations, including at U.S embassies in Lome, Togo and Khartoum, Sudan. In one case, a first name was listed without a last name. One name was listed three times.

Still, the Islamic State’s message was clear: “USA—You are our primary goal,” the hacking group posted in an English-language message on Telegram. “Your system failed to Tackling [sic] our attacks. Now we will Crush you again.”


An image pro-ISIS hackers posted on Telegram advertising their “wanted to be killed” list.

The so-called United Cyber Caliphate is a new alliance of pro-ISIS hackers consisting of three hacking groups, including the well-known Cyber Caliphate Army. Vocativ previously found that members of the Cyber Caliphate Army released target lists of current and former U.S. government officials, as well as kill lists of cops from Minnesota—though no known attacks originated from those past hacks. The same group has also falsely claimed to hack Google.



STATE DEPARTMENT: Set to Bring in INSANE Amount of Syrian Refugees to U.S.

Leave a comment

This is from Girls Just Wanna Have Guns.

America will end up like Europe with roving bands of these seventh century raping and murdering savages on our streets.

How outraged does this make you?

The State Department is hoping to bring an average of nearly 1,500 Syrian refugees to the United States per month in order to meet President Obama’s target of settling 10,000 refugees in the country by September.

About 1,300 refugees have already been placed in the United States since Obama first made the commitment in September.

That’s far fewer than those taken in by European countries such as Germany, who has dealt with an unprecedented wave of migrants fleeing Syria’s civil war, as well as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

Yet the settlement has provoked a significant backlash, mostly from Republicans, who argue it puts the U.S. at risk from terrorism.

“It’s clear that ISIS wants to, has planned on attempting to infiltrate refugee populations. This is a problem. If one person gets through who is planning a terrorist attack in our country, that’s a problem,” House Speaker Paul Ryan, who recently returned from a trip to the region, said Thursday.

“The administration — whether it’s Homeland Security or the FBI, cannot tell us that they can adequately screen people. There isn’t really a Syrian to talk to on that end of the equation to vet people, so it is a problem,” Ryan told reporters.

The State Department says it has fallen behind schedule in meting Obama’s goal partly due to a lack of personnel available to interview refugees.

It is now doing a “surge operation” in Amman, Jordan, that is designed to process the rest of the Syrian refugees in as little as three months and leave them enough time to get to the U.S. before September.

The State Department has devoted more staff in Amman to focus on processing Syrian refugees, as well as hired new employees, which the department says it needed anyway.

“By putting more officers in one place we can conduct more interviews. Partly we have a backlog because we don’t have enough officers to interview people,” Larry Bartlett, the State Department’s director of the Office of Refugee Admissions, told The Hill in a recent interview.

“So part of it is a little bit of shifting. We’ve also done some new hiring, and it was hiring that was timely. Those were people we needed anyway but they came onboard in time for this surge operation,” said Bartlett. He did not say how many staff were added in Amman.

The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) has prioritized sending more refugees to the U.S. than other countries, he said.

So far, about 9,500 Syrians have been interviewed in Amman since February 1, and 12,000 interviews should be completed by April 28, according to a State Department spokesperson.

Republican critics argue that speeding up the process to as little as three months will make it easier for terrorists to slip through.

Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.), who co-authored a bill to pause and bolster the refugee screening process, called State’s surge operation “unsecure” and said Obama should shut it down immediately.

‘This was all planned’: Former IG says Hillary, State Dept. are lying

1 Comment

This is from The New York Post.

The supporters of the Hidabeast will claim this is all a conspiracy of the Vast Right Wingers.

The State Department is lying when it says it didn’t know until it was too late that Hillary Clinton was improperly using personal e-mails and a private server to conduct official business — because it never set up an agency e-mail address for her in the first place, the department’s former top watchdog says.

“This was all planned in advance” to skirt rules governing federal records management, said Howard J. Krongard, who served as the agency’s inspector general from 2005 to 2008.The Harvard-educated lawyer points out that, from Day One, Clinton was never assigned and never used a e-mail address like previous secretaries.

“That’s a change in the standard. It tells me that this was premeditated. And this eliminates claims by the State Department that they were unaware of her private e-mail server until later,” Krongard said in an exclusive interview. “How else was she supposed to do business without e-mail?”
“This is a major gap. In fact, it’s without precedent,” he said. “It’s the longest period any department has gone without an IG.”He also points to the unusual absence of a permanent inspector general during Clinton’s entire 2009-2013 term at the department. He said the 5¹/₂-year vacancy was unprecedented.

Inspectors general serve an essential and unique role in the federal government by independently investigating agency waste, fraud and abuse. Their oversight also covers violations of communications security procedures.

“It’s clear she did not want to be subject to internal investigations,” Krongard said. An e-mail audit would have easily uncovered the secret information flowing from classified government networks to the private unprotected system she set up in her New York home.

He says “the key” to the FBI’s investigation of Emailgate is determining how highly sensitive state secrets in the classified network, known as SIPRNet, ended up in Clinton’s personal e-mails.

“The starting point of the investigation is the material going through SIPRNet. She couldn’t function without the information coming over SIPRNet,” Krongard said. “How did she get it on her home server? It can’t just jump from one system to the other. Someone had to move it, copy it. The question is who did that?”

As The Post first reported, the FBI is investigating whether Clinton’s deputies copied top-secret information from the department’s classified network to its unclassified network where it was sent to Hillary’s unsecured, unencrypted e-mail account.

FBI agents are focusing on three of Clinton’s top department aides. Most of the 1,340 Clinton e-mails deemed classified by intelligence agency reviewers were sent to her by her chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, or her deputy chiefs, Huma Abedin and Jake Sullivan, who now hold high positions in Clinton’s presidential campaign.

“They are facing significant scrutiny now,” Krongard said, and are under “enormous pressure to cooperate” with investigators.

He says staffers who had access to secret material more than likely summarized it for Clinton in the e-mails they sent to her; but he doesn’t rule out the use of thumb drives to transfer classified information from one system to the other, which would be a serious security breach. Some of the classified computers at Foggy Bottom have ports for memory sticks.

Either way, there would be an audit trail for investigators to follow. The SIPRNet system maintains the identity of all users and their log-on and log-off times, among other activities.

“This totally eliminates the false premise that she got nothing marked classified,” Krongard said. “She’s hiding behind this defense. But they [e-mails] had to be classified, because otherwise [the information in them] wouldn’t be on the SIPRNet.”

Added Krongard: “She’s trying to distance herself from the conversion from SIPRNet to [the nonsecure] NIPRNet and to her server, but she’s throwing her staffers under the bus.”
For one, he says, any criminal referral to the Justice Department from the FBI “will have to go through four loyal Democrat women” — Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell, who heads the department’s criminal division; Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; and top White House adviser Valerie Jarrett.Still, “It will never get to an indictment,” Krongard said.

Even if they accept the referral, he says, the case quickly and quietly will be plea-bargained down to misdemeanors punishable by fines in a deal similar to the one Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, secured for Gen. David Petraeus. In other words, a big slap on the wrist.

“He knows the drill,” Krongard said of Kendall.

Hillary Confidante Huma Abedin is Entangled in Email Scandal – Now a Judge Gives Her Bad News

1 Comment

This is from Independent Journal Review.

I think Huma Abedin may become the next Vince Foster.

Following the release of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s personal emails, the State Department has agreed to process for public release more than 29,000 pages of emails sent and received by longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin between 2009 and 2013.

According to POLITICO, Monday’s ruling comes after the conservative non-profit Judicial Watch sued the State Department for access to Abedin’s emails.

The decision by U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell reads:

“The parties have agreed that State will produce to Judicial Watch responsive, nonexempt records from within the recently received documents, excluding news clippings/briefings contained therein.”

The release of Abedin’s emails could also have a lasting impact on Clinton’s presidential campaign, should she win the Democratic nomination.

The State Department will begin reviewing Abedin’s emails on March 1st, one month after it finishes releasing all 55,000 pages of emails from Clinton’s archive.

It will then review the emails at a rate of at least 400 pages a month and disclose the releasable portion to Judicial Watch by April of 2017. However, it is unclear if all of the 29,000 pages in the archive will be reviewed during that time.

The Associated Press noted that Justice Department lawyers, who had initially not intended on releasing any of the emails from Abedin or any of the other senior Clinton staffers, had initially asked for a three-year period in which to process and release the emails.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton claims that the group wanted to review Abedin’s emails to ensure that all possible records related to Clinton were reviewed, telling the AP after the decision was announced that:

“Obviously, she was as close an aide as you could have had to Mrs. Clinton.

If Mrs. Clinton didn’t keep records she should have or destroyed or deleted them, maybe we can find them through Ms. Abedin. And Ms. Abedin’s activities are also controversial.”

Abedin, who is married to former New York Congressman Anthony Weiner, turned over the emails last year following the controversy over her boss’s use of a private server while running the State Department.

She was one of several senior officials during Clinton time at State who was asked to turn over any work-related messages in their personal accounts following the revelation that Clinton had only used a personal email account.

The longtime Clinton aide and personal assistant also had an official government email account for State Department work.

An attorney for Abedin, who is currently working as a senior advisor to Clinton’s presidential campaign, has not yet responded to POLITICO’s request for comment.


State Dept promotes Muslim cleric who backed fatwa on “killing of U.S. soldiers”

Leave a comment

This is from Jihad Watch.

Why is this seventh century savage working for the State Department?

Better yet, why is he being promoted?



Here is yet another sign of how deeply entrenched willful ignorance and fantasy-based policymaking are in Washington. Bin Bayyah condemned Boko Haram, so the Counter Terrorism Bureau promotes his website. They are either ignorant of or indifferent to the fact that he supported jihad attacks on U.S. soldiers. And given the atmosphere of the Obama State Department, it is unlikely that anyone cares even if they do know.

“State Dept Promotes Muslim Cleric Who Backed Fatwa on ‘Killing of U.S. Soldiers,’” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, May 23, 2014:

The State Department’s Counter Terrorism (CT) Bureau promoted on Friday a controversial Muslim scholar whose organization has reportedly backed Hamas and endorsed a fatwa authorizing the murder of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

The CT bureau on Friday tweeted out a link to the official website of Sheikh Abdallah Bin Bayyah, the vice president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS), a controversial organization founded by a Muslim Brotherhood leader “who has called for the death of Jews and Americans and himself is banned from visiting the U.S.,” according to Fox News.

Bin Bayyah is reported to have been one of several clerics who endorsed a 2004 fatwa that endorsed resistance against Americans fighting in Iraq, PJ Media reported in 2013, when Bin Bayyah met with Obama’s National Security Council staff at the White House.

The CT Bureau tweet linked to a press release on Bin Bayyah’s site condemning the kidnapping of hundreds of Nigerian girls by the Boko Haram group.

However, Bin Bayyah himself has been known to back controversial causes.

Bin Bayyah has “urged the U.N. to criminalize blasphemy,” according to reports, and spoke “out in favor of Hamas,” the terror group that rules over the West Bank.

The cleric also issued a fatwa in 2009  “barring ‘all forms of normalization’ with Israel,” according to Fox.

The 2004 fatwa on Iraq stated that “resisting occupation troops” is a “duty” for all Muslims, according to reports….

The Obama administration came under fire in June 2013 for holding a meeting with Bin Bayyah at the White House….



Leave a comment

This is from Breitbart.

Obama is the biggest Anti Semite that has ever held to office of President of The United States.

Genesis 12:2-3 (King James Version)

Genesis 12:2-3

King James Version (KJV)

2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

At the same time the US State Department is relaxing entry requirements to visa applicants with Islamist terrorist connections, and reassuring President Putin of Russia that any sanctions against travel to the US placed upon those responsible for Russia’s invasion Ukraine will be limited to no more than a “few dozen” named individuals, it is dramatically increasing its rejection rate of Israelis seeking visas to visit the US.

While the State Department denies it, Israeli officials now suspect  their country is being deliberately sanctioned as part of an unannounced administration policy to punish the Jewish state.

This week their fears were publicly shared by none other than administration ally NY Senator Charles Schumer, who, in a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry,  demanded an end to the “State Department policy of categorically denying young Israelis tourist visas that makes it nearly impossible for any young Israeli to visit the U.S.”


The harsh and unexplained crackdown against Israeli tourists, first felt in 2009 has been tightening ever since, particularly, say those familiar with the matter, within the last year. When first imposed, the travel bans were extended to all young Israelis seeking to visit the US after completing their compulsory military service. Israeli reports examining such records show that, starting in 2012, rejections of Israeli visa requests were applied preemptively and categorically to all Israeli nationals of student age.

The State Department confirms there has been a 400% increase in the visa refusal rate for Israeli citizens since 2007, when only 2.5% of all Israeli visa requests were denied, as compared to 2013 when 9.7% were. In fact, rejection rates for Israeli visa applicants were so high in 2013, that Israel was expelled from the State Department’s visa waiver program. Some of the countries whose citizens are eligible to participate the US visa waiver program, in addition to traditional and treaty allies like Canada and the UK, include Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

State Department agency deemed ‘critical’ to information security is a mess, report shows

Leave a comment

This is from Fox News Politics.

The State Department was first ran into the ground by

Hillary ‘What Does It Matter” Clinton.

It is  destroyed by John “Lurch I tossed my medals”Kerry.

We are being laughed at world-wide.

An obscure little State Department agency whose work is called “critical to the Department’s information security posture” has been in a shambles for years, and is still in chaos, according to an audit report by the department’s inspector general released yesterday.

As one result of all the bumbling and inaction, the security checks that the agency is supposed to perform and subsequent approvals for use that it is supposed to bestow every three years on 36 of those State Department systems have lapsed entirely, meaning that they are operating, in effect, illegally.

Some of the lapses have gone on for two years; in at least a couple of cases involving information systems that the audit calls “primary general support systems,” the lapses have gone on since 2007.

One of the systems that is operating without a current license, known as iPost, was given an award two years ago for “significantly improving the effectiveness of the nation’s cyber security.”  According to the inspector general’s report, auditors couldn’t find any documentation to back up how the award-winning system was created or maintained, nor any source code for the information it was supposed to track.

There is more — much more — concerning the 22-person agency, known as the Office of Information Assurance of the State Department’s Bureau of Information Resource Management (IRM/IA), which among other things certifies the security status of more than 170 information systems in the State Department. The report comes at a time of heightened concern about both cyber-security and torrents of information leaks in the U.S. government.

According to the audit report, the agency has statutory responsibility as State’s “lead office for information assurance and security.” Its top official, currently William Lay, is known as State’s Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), who reports up to State’s Chief Information Officer, currently Steven C. Taylor.

Despite the agency’s august legal status, IRM/IA’s staff apparently has no sense of what security functions their unit is actually required to perform, has failed for years to update information security manuals used by thousands of other State Department personnel, and has often left important details about the  vulnerability of  State’s  information systems where they can be accessed by  people with lower-level security classifications.


The State Department said in a statement that it was taking the report’s findings seriously.

Much of the agency’s certification work has apparently been done by outside contractors, often unsupervised, and often performing duties that are supposed to be done only by government employees.

Neither contractors nor staffers apparently maintain much documentation about their work, or even about how the contractors are being paid under a $19 million contract that could swell to $60 million in outlying years.  As the report puts it tersely, “Management is unable to verify the accuracy of reported costs.”

Even the presence of inspectors didn’t seem to stir much concern. Though the unnamed CISO said he would reassign responsibilities to fix some of the oversight problems, “no corrective action was taken during the course of the inspection,” which lasted for six weeks earlier this year.

In effect, IRM/IA seems to be something of a zombie agency. IRM/IA staffers, according to the inspector general’s report, don’t show up for inter-departmental meetings, don’t participate in their Bureau’s strategic planning exercises, don’t keep track of important documentation in the security certification process, and can’t find a major portion of their budget receipts.

Even the relatively good news that many of the agency’s functions have migrated to other parts of the larger Bureau comes with the fact that in some important cases, this occurred because IRM/IA personnel didn’t show up for meetings where they shared joint responsibility.

Nor does the agency’s management seem to have cared much for a long time about where it is going or what it needs to do to get there. According to the report, the agency “has no mission statement and is not engaged in strategic planning.”

“There is no evidence of IRM/IA management engaging in a comprehensive strategic review to assess its current capabilities and future needs,” the report says. “The CISO and his division chiefs have not reviewed operations to determine what information assurance and security functions they are required to perform or are currently handling.”

Or, to put it even more bluntly, the inspector general’s auditing team “could not validate whether IRM/IA has not been able to meet priorities since the office has not defined any priorities.”

In a bid to correct the fiasco, the inspectors has issued 32 recommendations, including the requirement that IRM/IA “participate regularly”  in department-wide meetings and “share learned information from such meetings with its staff,” along with a strong hint that other functions might be hived off to others — who happen to be doing some of them anyway.

The State Department said in its statement, in response to the report: “The Department takes the OIG feedback seriously and is committed to addressing the recommendations and the concerns that led to the assessment. Mr. William G. Lay was appointed to the position of Deputy Chief Information Officer for Information Assurance and Chief Information Security Officer for the U.S. Department of State in late 2012.”

Read more:

Bill May Allow Korean M1 Garand Rifles to Finally Return to the U.S

Leave a comment

This is from Outdoor Hub.

I think this is great but I do not see Obama and DemocRats

letting this happen.

I do not think the M-1 Garand’s or M-1 carbines are being used

in drive by shootings by gang bangers.

 Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming) is to be applauded.  

A large number of M1 Garand rifles exported to South Korea several decades ago may be able to return to the U.S. with the introduction of a new bill by Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming).A large number of M1 Garand rifles exported to South Korea several decades ago may be able to return to the U.S. with the introduction of a new bill by Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming).

Tens of thousands of M1 Garand rifles and even more M1 Carbines lay in storage somewhere in South Korea. Originally shipped to the Asian nation several decades ago to help equip their military, the weapons are now outdated on the modern battlefield. Among collectors and enthusiasts however, they are held up as invaluable pieces of American history and ingenuity. Stocks of the rifle within the U.S. are fast dwindling (if not depleted already) and those who want to get their hands on one are looking across the Pacific.

Those in favor of returning these firearms home have been trying for years to import the surplus rifles and carbines. The South Korean government was eager to offload the rifles for much needed funds, but efforts to ship the rifles back were blocked repeatedly on the U.S. end due to security concerns. Those against the import say that the firearms could be purchased by individuals for illicit purposes. Gun advocates say that was no reason to ban the import of the rifles.

“Any guns that retail in the United States, of course, including these [M1 Garands], can only be sold to someone who passes the National Instant Check System,” David Kopel, research director at the conservative Independence Institute, told Fox Newsin 2010. “There is no greater risk from these particular guns than there is from any other guns sold in the United States.”

In 2012 it seemed that the federal government reversed its decision and will be allowing the M1 Garands to come home, along with a limited number of carbines. The plan was for the firearms to be auctioned off and imported to the U.S., where they will be sold through the Civilian Marksmanship Program. Reportedly, the State Department delayed the import and now will not allow the rifles to enter the country. Frustrated over the situation, U.S. Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming) recently introduced a bill to counter the State Department’s decision.

“It’s disappointing that legislation is even necessary to allow U.S. citizens to access perfectly legal and regulated firearms, in this case storied, U.S.-made rifles that are pieces of U.S. military history,” Rep. Lummis said. “This is a political stunt on the part of the State Department, pure and simple, while denying the exercise of Second Amendment rights by law-abiding citizens, firearm collectors, and competitive marksmen. The State Department has no business blocking domestic firearm ownership; they are way out of bounds and my legislation will put them back in their place.”

A release on the congresswoman’s website read:

On Tuesday U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo) introduced H.R. 2247, the Collectible Firearms Protection Act. The bill reverses a State Department decision to block the importation of historic M1 Garand rifles and M1 carbines from South Korea. Originally furnished by the United States to South Korea for military purposes over 50 years ago, the rifles are widely sought collectors’ items and among the most popular rifles in marksmanship competitions. The rifles are perfectly legal to manufacture and sell in the United States and like all firearm imports would be subject to the federal rules and regulations governing retail firearm sales. A similar sale from South Korea was approved during the Reagan Administration. The current State Department’s interference with the sale runs counter to the intent of Congress, which on two prior occasions amended the law to allow for this kind of transaction.

Thanks to The Truth About Guns for highlighting this bill.

Image from user Curiosandrelics on the Wikipedia Commons





Leave a comment

This is from Human Events.

Just Why Is This News?

Anybody with a IQ higher than a rock knew this fact.

Obama thinks the oil industry is a major evil.

Obama thinks petroleum products causes Globull Warming. 


Why Obama will probably kill the Keystone Pipeline


Here’s what most people do not realize: major oil pipelines extending 2,151 miles from the Canadian Tar Sands already have been completed and are in operation from Hardisty, Alberta, east through Saskatchewan and Manitoba and south through eastern North and South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas and then on to refineries in southern Illinois and central Oklahoma, carrying 590,000 barrels of oil each day.

If they knew that, they would certainly wonder why there is an uproar about adding capacity for an additional 830,000 barrels a day through new pipelines from Hardisty through eastern Montana and southwestern North Dakota, where it would pick up U.S. oil from the now famous Bakken Fields and then move further east through South Dakota and Nebraska to Steele City, Nebraska, where the existing pipeline travels on to Cushing, Oklahoma, and then continue it about 500 more miles to the Gulf Coast of Texas, where so many refineries are located.

Canadian oil is cleaner than most of what we get from Venezuela and the Persian Gulf. And our rejection of the Canadian oil will not slow development of the tar sands, a supposed goal of the environmental activists. Canada will simply build a pipeline to Vancouver and sell the oil to Asian countries.

According to Marita Noon, executive director of Energy Makes America Great, The Heritage Foundation has concluded “the project will create some 179,000 jobs on American soil and continue good trade relations with a close ally.” What’s not to like? Plenty, for some people.

The late environmental activist Paul Ehrlich once said that having cheap energy is the equivalent of putting a machine gun in the hands of an idiot child. That, I am afraid, is exactly what our alphabet soup of environmental activist groups evidently believe, which is why they support wind and solar energy with all their might: because they know it will never be cheap. In fact, they know it will never even be economically feasible.

Now they are panicked over the oil industry’s game-changing ability to develop heretofore uneconomical shale gas and oil with the advent of horizontal drilling and hydro-fracking, the latter technology having been used for 60 years in conventional oil drilling without any environmental damage whatsoever.

For years now, our government has ordered up environmental impact studies on the Keystone XL Pipeline, and when each study concluded there were no serious problems, they ordered up a new study. There have been four in all, the latest from the State Department, of all agencies, which again concluded there would be no major environmental impact. Now the State Department is calling for public feedback even though there have been tens of thousands of public comments already.

The drumbeat has failed so far. In mid-March, 17 Democrats voted with 45 Republicans in the Senate for a budget amendment supporting the pipeline, up from 11 Democrats voting for a similar amendment last year. That is good news, as is a recent Fox News poll reported in the Wall Street Journal on March 27, in which 70 percent of registered voters expressed support for construction of the pipeline.

Meanwhile, the labor unions, longtime Democrat supporters, are four-square in favor of the pipeline for the jobs it will bring. So how can the pipeline lose? Easily.

Recently the environmental activists staged a demonstration in Washington urging President Obama to stand his ground. Few showed up and some were arrested, but they made their point. Environment expert Daryl Hannah, best known for her movie role as a mermaid, said the State Department report was “totally wrong, flat out totally wrong.” Can the president resist that siren’s call? I doubt it. His office is a wholly owned subsidiary of both Hollywood and the green movement, with the administration having already spent billions and billions of dollars on failed green projects.

But there still could be a happy ending for most of us: the railroad. After nearly going bankrupt in the 1970s, U.S. railroads are back stronger than ever. They have saved North Dakota from overflowing with a glut of oil, by filling miles and miles of tank cars on Obama supporter Warren Buffet’s Burlington Northern Line with 500,000 barrels of oil each day and carrying it to refineries on the west coast of the United States. (Hmm, could that be another reason Obama opposes the pipeline?) By year’s end their capacity will rise to 700,000 barrels a day.

The railroads are fully capable of building new track connecting the Dakotas with our Gulf Coast-unless Obama and his Hollywood friends decide this, too, would be an environmental hazard. Stay tuned.


WH: ‘We Decline to Comment’ on When Obama Learned of E-Mails, Met With NSC on Benghazi

1 Comment

This is from CNSNews.

Who will Obama to fall on their sword for him?

He got Hillary to take the blame for a while.

No matter what happens Obama is never to blame.

Will Hillary will take the blame once more?


( – The White House is declining to say when President Barack Obama first learned of three e-mails that the State Department sent to the White House on Sept. 11, 2012, directly notifying the Executive Office of the President that the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was under attack, that U.S. Amb. Chris Stevens was at the Benghazi mission at the time of the attack, and that the group Ansar al-Sharia had taken credit for the attack.

The White House also declined to say when the president first met with the National Security Council after the Benghazi attack.

“I have been asked by one of our spokespeople to relay ‘that we decline to comment,’” said White House National Security Staff aide Debbie Bird in a written response to had asked Bird: 1) “When did the President first meet with the National Security Council after the Benghazi attack on 9/11/12?” 2) “When did White House staff first discuss the substance of the e-mails that went to the White House with the President or with the National Security Advisor?”

Carney also took a question about the e-mails today during a press gaggle held aboard Air Force One at 9:34 a.m. A reporter asked: “Jay, there are some emails that have emerged, which suggest that the White House and other areas of the government were told within hours of the Benghazi attack that an extremist group had claimed responsibility. How is that compatible with the idea that it was a spontaneous attack?”

Carney downplayed the significance of the State Department emails.

“There were emails about all sorts of information that was becoming available in the aftermath of the attack,” Carney said. “The email you’re referring to was an open-source, unclassified email referring to an assertion made on a social media site that everyone in this room had access to and knew about instantaneously. There was a variety of information coming in.

“The whole point of an intelligence community and what they do is to assess strands of information and make judgments about what happened and who was responsible,” said Carney, “and I would refer you to what we’ve already said about, and what the DNI [Director of National Intelligence] has already said about, the initial assessments of the intelligence community, and the fact that throughout this process, I and others made very clear that our preliminary assessments were preliminary, that an investigation was underway, and that as more facts became available, we would make the American people aware of them.

“Again,” said Carney, “this was an open-source, unclassified email about a posting on a Facebook site. I would also note I think that within a few hours, that organization itself claimed that it had not been responsible. Neither should be taken as fact. That’s why there’s an investigation underway.”

The NSC is chaired by the president, and includes Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder. A NSC meeting would allow the leader of the intelligence community to communicate directly with the leader of the State Department in the presence of the president and for all of them to weigh any conflicting information.

The three emails in question, which were obtained by CBS News, were sent by the State Department to various government officials, including two officials in the Executive Office of the President, on Sept. 11, 2012, while the attack on the Benghazi was taking place and immediately after it had taken place.

Each of the emails has been redacted so that the suffixes of most of the email addresses are intact—showing where the people who sent them and received them work—but the prefixes are blacked out, so the personal identities of the senders and receivers is obscured.

The first email was sent by a State Department officials at 4:05 PM on Sept. 11, 2012. It carries the subject line: “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack.” The text of the email says: “The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack. Embassy Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots, explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM [Chief of Mission] personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.”

This email went to at least 32 other officials in the State Deparment. It also went to an official at the office of the Director of National Intelligence, to someone at the FBI, and to someone at the Defense Department. It also went to two officials at the White House.

A State Department official sent out a second email to the same list of recipients 49 minutes later at 4:54 PM. The subject line on this email said: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi.” The subject line said: “Embassy Tripoli reports the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi has stopped and the compound has been cleared. A response is on the site attempting to locate COM personnel.

A State Department official sent out a third email at 6:07 PM on Sept. 11, 2012—a little over two hours after the first email went out. This email went to a different set of recipients, but still included two officials at the White House. The subject line on this email was: “Ansal al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack.” The text said: “Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.”

None of the emails said anything about a YouTube video or a spontaneous demonstrations at the U.S. mission in Benghazi.

Five days after the State Department sent these emails to the White House, U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice went on national television programs and told the nation that the administration believed that what had happened in Benghazi had started as a spontaneous protest against a video that had been posted on YouTube.

“But based on the best information we have to date,” Rice said on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” “what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what, it began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo, where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy sparked by this hateful video.”

“We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned,” said Rice.

The day after the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, the president traveled to Las Vegas for a fundraiser.


Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: