Whistleblower and deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya Greg Hicks said in sworn testimony Wednesday that he received a phone call in Benghazi from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at 2 a.m. on September 11, 2012. During this phone call he said "we are under attack." He did not mention a protest nor did he mention a YouTube video. Further, before he was killed and dragged through the streets of Benghazi, Ambassador Chris Stevens called Hicks and said, "We are under attack." Again, no mention of a protest outside of the consulate and no mention of a video. What the administration "knew" was that this was a terrorist attack as it was happening yet told the public for months the incident was a result of a protest getting out of control.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Rep. Peter King (R-NY) joined Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday this weekend to discuss some of the debate surrounding how Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev should be treated. While King insisted on enemy combatant status and doubled down on remarks about surveilling the Muslim community, Feinstein wasn't convinced.
Feinstein said she believed Tsarnaev should be questioned under the public safety exception and later read Miranda rights because that's "the only legal way to proceed." The senator further "regretted" that there's even a debate about whether he should be treated as an enemy combatant. King then chimed to assert that the suspect should be treated as an enemy combatant "for the purpose of interrogation."
"The battlefield is now in the United States, so I believe he is an enemy combatant," the congressman argued. There are simply too many unanswered questions, he added, noting "this is a unique opportunity to go into a treasure trove of intelligence."
We're likely to find out, Feinstein added, "that this was somebody who did want to participate in a jihadist event." There will be "ample evidence" to convict the suspect, she contended, "and it should likely be a death penalty case under federal law."
King countered that he wasn't concerned with the conviction, because he knows the suspect will indeed be convicted, but rather he wants to be able to obtain additional intelligence from Tsarnaev. That can only be done "effectively" if he's treated as an enemy combatant. Asked about Tsarnaev not being on an FBI watch list following his trip to Russia, King wondered what was "deficient," "what went wrong." Lauding the FBI for their work resolving the case, the congressman said, in terms of taking action beforehand, this was just the latest in a series of such mishaps.
"The threat is coming from within the Muslim community in the these cases," King doubled down, asked about his recent remarks about "increased surveillance" of that community. Ninety-nine percent of Muslims are "outstanding Americans," he added, but still, that is where the threat originates.
Feinstein didn't find that discussion to be very "helpful," emphasizing instead the need to look at the facts. It's worth looking into, she added, but there's no need to create "hatred" and "disdain" on television about it.
We must remember that 'Sequestration' was Barack Obama's idea and Obama signed the 'Sequester' into law. Now Obama is not only lying saying 'Sequester' was Congress's idea, Obama is trying to punish and hurt as Many Americans as possible - including School Children who were scheduled to tour the White House.
What happens when the clock strikes midnight on March 1, 2013?
• If March 1 arrives without any replacement legislation, as many anticipate, sequestration will begin with an order from President Obama on Friday.
• Under budget law, the president has until 11:59 p.m. that day to issue an order to begin the $85 billion in cuts from the fiscal 2013 budgets of federal agencies.
• The law requires the Office of Management and Budget to transmit a report to Congress at the same time detailing the reductions in each budgetary account.
• The Congressional Budget Office estimated earlier this month that sequestration would reduce defense spending by 7.9 percent and domestic spending by 4.6 percent over the year. The actual calculations are made by OMB and have not been released to the public.
• OMB will have to reapportion federal funding after sequestration, reconfiguring what departments and agencies are allowed to spend under the reductions.
Last week, after returning from an interview on a network that makes liberals cringe, I came home to an inbox full of emails. Usually, when I come home to a full inbox, it’s because a professor has done something stupid and people want me to write about it. This was no exception. A professor at West Liberty University had banned Fox News as a source and told her students that the "biased" station makes her "cringe." That kind of thinking is common among professors. But few professors are stupid enough to reveal it in a syllabus.
Stephanie Wolfe, a visiting assistant professor at West Liberty, made her own bias clear when she told her students orally that they could not cite the news station in any of their work for the semester. The problem was that she also put the following in her syllabus: "The tagline 'Fox News' makes me cringe. Please do not subject me to this biased news station. I would almost rather you print off an article from the Onion (sic)."
For those who did not miss the irony, "bias" occurs when someone allows an emotional inclination to interfere with the ability to process information. So the good professor banned Fox for being "biased" one sentence after she admitted that her emotional inclination impedes her ability to process information presented by Fox. Why not ban herself as a biased source of information?
Of course, putting this in her syllabus was stupid. But it brought about a good result. Students were able to share the information with others, including Fox News. That resulted in a rare national television appearance by a university president willing to express his concerns about academic freedom. In fact, President Capehart handled the situation perfectly by registering a concern that Wolfe's exercise of academic freedom was infringing on the academic freedom of her students to "gather information and look at as many different sources as possible on any side, before you reach your opinion."
Shortly after these remarks were made, Professor Wolfe reversed the ban and recognized her students' legitimate interest in examining different points of view - even those that do not comport with those of the professor. For this reason, I plan to contact the university using this link. It will be a rare opportunity to thank a university administration for doing the right thing. Even if you don't have time to write West Liberty, you've learned two things by taking the time to read this column:
Administrative support is needed to enable rogue faculty members. For years, leftist faculty members have relied on administrative support from Deans, Provosts, and Presidents. Whenever these administrators intervene with vague statements about "academic freedom" a signal is sent to the rogue faculty member. That signal is that they may do whatever they want without suffering repercussions in the workplace. But as soon as an administrator speaks about his concerns over balancing the freedom of different parties, the professor knows she is in trouble. Anything less than full administrative support will cause the professor to capitulate.
Justice often follows when we obtain written admissions. One reason the president responded in such a positive way was evidentiary. This was no mere accusation. Wolfe carelessly put her remarks in writing. So there could be no denying that a problem existed. The evidence forced Capehart to make a decision. And he made the right one.
Most professors spew their bias in the classroom without recording it on the syllabus. Therefore, students have to be vigilant. When, for example, your professor tells the class (in class) to refrain from using Fox as a source, you should seek clarification via email. Something like the following will suffice:
"Dear Professor Doe: I light of your ban on using Fox News as a source, I was wondering whether using MSNBC or Al Jazeera would also be unacceptable?"
Professors are often so arrogant that they will use the classroom to pressure students into accepting their beliefs. And they are often so careless that they will repeat their errors in writing when pressed. As you will see in my next column, it can be quite embarrassing when such coercion is exposed. To be continued...
Mitt Romney campaign adviser Ed Gillespie joined Fox News Sunday to talk about the grim economic news last week. Host Chris Wallace noted that employers added the fewest jobs in a year and the stock market wiped out all the gains it had made in 2012. He asked Gillespie what Mitt Romney thinks is going wrong. Gillespie answered, “This is a hostile environment for job creation in our economy. And that’s why, frankly, it adds a sense of urgency in terms of this year’s election to be able to turn things around because the only thing that’s going to change it are changing the policies and that means changing the person in the White House.”
President Obama has said, “Congress hasn’t acted on enough of the other ideas in that bill that would make a difference and help create jobs right now. There’s no excuse for that, not when so many people are still looking for work.”
What Americans need in our next president isn’t complicated. Given our nation’s pressing problems, we just need a president capable of saying “NO”. The United States is, once again, at an important turning point, brought to the brink by Barack Obama’s profligate spending. In order to reverse the damage caused by 4 years of Obama’s left-leaning, entitlement-driven, anti-business policies, the nation needs a leader who is willing to stop the fiscal hemorrhaging and just say “no”.
If America is to continue on its path of greatness, continue to be a beacon to the rest of the world, we must get our financial expenditures under control and create more private sector jobs. That is going to require an individual capable of taking a tough stance against further indulgent government expenditures, a leader willing to say – “no”.
Unfortunately, the list of projects, policies, individuals and organizations to whom “NO” must be said is growing quite long.
Say “no” to America-bashing-- Americans deserve a president who believes that we are an exceptional nation, capable of achieving everything that is good and great. We deserve a president who acknowledges and appreciates the extraordinary contributions in education, defense, industry, medicine, technology and philanthropy that Americans have made to the world in the past 236 years.
But don’t stop there—
Small businesses, entrepreneurs, and job creators are already groaning from the weight of the many and new regulations Obama has initiated in the past three and a half years, so say “no” to the regulatory stranglehold that is stifling our nation’s entrepreneurs.
Say “no” to further bailouts and allow the free market to determine winners and losers-- Solyndra's mind-boggling profligacy, squandering $523 million in taxpayer money in less than two years and filing for bankruptcy protection, should be incentive enough to--
Say “no” to subsidies for absurdly expensive energy schemes that yield little and do nothing to reduce the price of gas at the pump for the average American.
Say “no” to ethanol subsidies and the $6 billion annual gift to the ethanol lobby.
Say “no to expanding entitlements, whether they be food stamps, social security, Obamacare or Medicaid—we can’t afford it.
Say “no” to czars. With over 40 czars pre-empting and usurping the responsibilities and authorities of their Senate-confirmed doppelgangers, is it any wonder that there is no accountability and no spending discipline?
Say “no” to union pandering—and don’t blame FOX News for your problems when greedy union negotiators demand more and more.
Say no to environmental extremists, who seek to reduce, or shut down, the new production of oil and gas in the name of “greening” the planet and “sustainability”.
Say “no” to dodgy schemes that encourage voter fraud, even when those schemes are advanced by your Attorney General as a way to ensure your re-election.
Say “no” to incivility in political discourse so that our congress and executive branch agencies can return to working together for the good of all Americans. Of course, leading by example would be an excellent start.
Of course, there are many other areas in which “no” might need to be said—I’m sure I’ve missed a few.
But, as we approach November-- and unemployment remains at historic high levels, as the deficit continues to escalate, as federal government bloat continues, as entitlements expand regardless of our ability to pay for them, and as many in Washington continue to delude themselves into thinking that they can kick the can of accountability down the road for a few more years—responsible Americans , getting ready to vote for the next president of the United States, need to ask themselves one question: how good is this guy a saying “no” and sticking to it?
President Obama's re-elect team defended White House energy policy on Sunday as gas prices shoot toward the $4 mark and beyond, a level that could devastate voters' pocketbooks as well as Obama's chances for a second term.
Nationally, gas prices are $3.53 a gallon, up 25 cents since Jan. 1, and likely headed to $4.25 a gallon by late April.
Republicans have demanded more oil production at home, as well as building the Keystone XL pipeline across the middle of the U.S. to allow oil from Canada to reach Texas refineries.
NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.
A look back at the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001
Flight 93 Fought Back and NOW it is our Turn.
Firefighters, Police, EMT and Citizens performed rescues and NOW it is our Turn.
Navy Seals Fought Back and NOW it is our Turn.
Just 33 days after Barack Obama's swearing in as POTUS, Barack Obama sent 900 million American taxpayer dollars to the Terrorist Organization HAMAS (Palestinians) that trained Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - mastermind of 9-11-01.
Judge Napolitano weighed in on the battle over the health care law and the decision facing the three-member appellate court in Atlanta. Napolitano says these appeals court rulings, of which there are approximately seven, are "meaningless" because the issue will likely reach the Supreme Court in 2012 with potential ramifications to the presidential election.
NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.
n a striking report just filed, Fox News correspondent Mike Tobin gave insight into the destruction in the stricken city of Joplin, Mo. Tobin stood amid debris in the parking lot of St. John's Hospital, where some cars were nearly unrecognizable after a deadly twister passed through the town. Although death toll estimates still come in at 89, Tobin says that number is likely to increase as more search and rescue teams are able to brave the still-severe weather to comb the area.
NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.
In their raid on bin Laden's compound, Navy Seals were able to recover hard drives, computers, and other materials now being scoured by analysts for further intelligence. Cyberterror Analyst Morgan Wright on the techniques used to recover information.
Thumb Drives or USB Drives come in all shapes and sizes. Osama Bin Laden had no Phone lines or Internet access in his compound. Instead Osama Bin Laden used Human Couriers to send and receive information.
Whistleblower and deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya Greg Hicks said in sworn testimony Wednesday that he received a phone call in Benghazi from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at 2 a.m. on September 11, 2012. During this phone call he said "we are under attack." He did not mention a protest nor did he mention a YouTube video. Further, before he was killed and dragged through the streets of Benghazi, Ambassador Chris Stevens called Hicks and said, "We are under attack." Again, no mention of a protest outside of the consulate and no mention of a video. What the administration "knew" was that this was a terrorist attack as it was happening yet told the public for months the incident was a result of a protest getting out of control.
